Tag: Featured Story

Even in the age of LEDs, halogen landing and taxi lights shine. Although many new aircraft come standard with LEDs, halogen remains more cost-effective for older planes for several reasons. One is the enduring popularity of halogen as most existing aircraft were manufactured before the introduction of LEDs. When you consider that the average lifespan of an aircraft is 20 years, it’s no surprise that halogen lamps are a fixture on 90% of existing aircraft. In addition, some airlines refurbish aircraft to extend the life of their fleet, making it likely that halogen lamps will be around for years to come.

Here are four reasons why halogen PAR (parabolic aluminized reflector) lamps make an excellent, cost-effective alternative to expensive LED lights:

1) Halogen is cost-effective for existing aircraft fleets that continue to dominate the skies

One LED lamp can cost more than 20 times the cost of a halogen bulb. If replacing halogen lamps on a single aircraft is a substantial investment, consider the cost of installing LEDs for an entire fleet. For example, one major airline maintains approximately 1,300 aircraft. About 1,000 of these are Boeings and Airbuses that were manufactured when halogen lamps were the order of the day. Most of these aircraft still require two landing lights and two taxi lights, meaning that the cost of replacing halogen bulbs with LED lights would cost around $1.2 million. With COVID-19 wreaking havoc on travel plans and federal relief held up by congressional gridlock, few airlines are able or willing to invest this kind of money in lighting.

2) Long life means less maintenance needed to change out bulbs, downtime and delays

While halogen bulbs don’t have the same longevity as LED lights, a halogen PAR landing light can last 100 to 300 hours, provided it is not damaged during landing or takeoff. A halogen taxi lamp can last even longer—up to 1,000 hours in many cases. An aircraft that locates its lights on the wing, behind a room temperature vulcanized silicone shield that must be unbolted and removed to access the lights, may require a full day to replace lighting, whereas an aircraft that places lights in easier to reach locations can be serviced in as little as an hour.

3) Brightness and durability last throughout the life of the lamp

Well-made halogen lamps will maintain candela output (the measurement of illumination produced by an output beam) that exceeds industry standards. Halogen lamps can withstand countless takeoffs and landings thanks to advancements in the design of filaments and the light weight of lamps. However, it is worth noting not all halogen lamps are created equal. Some lower quality lamps produce less than half the industry-mandated candela output, which can increase the chance of collisions and other accidents. Poor visibility is also a common source of complaints from pilots tasked with providing a smooth flight—and safe landing—for their passengers.

4) Halogen is regularly available, and high-quality options are available from different manufacturers

When it comes time to replace the lights on their aircraft, airlines should make sure they purchase high quality halogen lamps that produce at least 700,000 candelas from reputable manufacturers, follow instructions in the IPC (Illustrated Parts Catalog) and change gaskets according to the recommended manufacturer’s schedule. To find a reputable manufacturer, airlines should consider the quality of the lab and procedures used for product testing, the quality of the materials used, whether the manufacturer adheres to all IPC requirements and the availability of robust customer support.

Finding a long-lasting, cost-effective lighting solution during lean economic times is vital because replacing lights can be a labor-intensive and time-consuming process. With COVID-19 disrupting travel plans, airlines must find cost-effective options for their taxi and landing lights. For existing aircraft, replacing lights with halogen bulbs provides a durable, economical alternative to LED lighting. In addition to better pricing, high quality halogen bulbs can reduce maintenance costs and lost revenue due to delayed flights. For airlines to thrive during tough times, halogen lamps offer a combination of efficiency, durability and affordability that is hard to beat.

John Fogel, Halogen Product Manager at Amglo, has worked with the company for more than 10 years in product development, qualifying products with the FAA, and building partnerships. For more information, visit www.amglo.com

The catastrophic travel slump caused by COVID-19 has resulted in thousands of aircraft being grounded worldwide. This unprecedented situation has substantially disrupted aircraft maintenance and overhauls, including in the critically important engine sector.

Mindful of the severe economic challenges their customers continue to face during the pandemic, engine OEMs and MROs are doing their best to assist them through this crisis. Aviation Maintenance magazine spoke with the OEMs and top MROs to find out what they are doing
to help.

COVID-19’s Impact

Understanding the engine MROs’ responses to COVID-19 begins with assessing the pandemic’s impact on themselves and their aircraft clients. To put it simply, everyone has been experiencing real economic pain.

“The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business was immediate. As many airlines grounded their fleet at least to some extent, the need for full overhauls declined quite drastically,” says Marc Wilken, Lufthansa Technik’s senior director of Product Sales/Engine Services. “Airlines [who were] still operating kept those aircraft in the air that did not require any major cash injection like engine overhauls or big base maintenance events.”

At Pratt & Whitney, “Aircraft and engine utilization was significantly impacted during the pandemic, though we are seeing narrow-body aircraft return to service as the domestic markets recover, and continued strong demand in the cargo segment,” says Joe Sylvestro, the company’s vice president of Global Aftermarket Operations. The ways in which aircraft owners/operators have responded to this trend – and the impact it has had on Pratt & Whitney – depends on their specific financial circumstances. “Some customers are taking advantage of this period as a time to get some needed maintenance completed while others are deferring maintenance if possible in accordance with their revised business and fleet plans,” Sylvestro says.

Pratt & Whitney’s experience has been shared by other engine MROs such as GE Aviation and StandardAero.

“We are adjusting our MRO operations to align with reduced market demand and evolving customers’ needs,” says Mike Hoffmeister, GE Aviation’s general manager of Customer & Product Support. “For our legacy engines, we adjusted our engine induction schedule and spare parts forecast accordingly. A positive dimension resulting from the crisis has been the opportunity to accelerate our upgrade program for the GTF engine fleet, especially retrofits of the low pressure turbine to improve the fleet health to ensure our customers are well-positioned for the recovery. To this end, we are expanding the GTF MRO network capabilities and capacity globally to support customers as the fleet continues to grow.”

“StandardAero’s commercial aviation sector has clearly been the hardest hit, and we have seen a direct impact to our commercial engine MRO volumes,” adds Jeff Poirier, VP/GM of StandardAero Turboprops and Fleets. The only good news is that the company’s broad portfolio of commercial aviation, business aviation, military, helicopter and component repair businesses is “offering us some insulation from the more immediate impact of the pandemic,” he says.

Pivoting to Survive

Pivoting is the buzzword of the COVID-19 era. It refers to refocusing a company’s business activities to pursue sales where work is available and to turn away from sectors where it is not.
To help their aircraft customers survive, the world’s engine MROs have had to pivot. Doing this successfully hasn’t been easy. “The initial challenge was understanding the magnitude and speed of change within our airline customer base, many of whom were dealing with operational hours, fleet forecasting and hypothesis for their own capacity,” says Carl Glover, vice president Sales & Marketing – Americas with AAR’s Aviation Services Group.

Having assessed the new normal of COVID-19 and how it is affecting demand for engine MRO services, AAR went back to the strategic drawing board. “This then proceeded to a game plan for dealing with customer needs on capitalization of fleets, assets and flexible ways to work through the pandemic,” Glover told Aviation Maintenance. “For instance, we had some cargo customers who were heavily involved in the movement of support for global PPE, healthcare assistance and freight who we focused upon for operational reasons.”

Like AAR, Rolls-Royce has undertaken a similar reassessment; one that has consumed a lot of unplanned in-house hours. The reason: “Our customers still have the same number of aircraft, but the utilization has changed – so while the number of aircraft flying at any one time has reduced, in fact our workload has increased, because we now have to understand new customer requirements,” says Lee McConnellogue, Rolls-Royce’s senior vice president of Aircraft Availability Services. “That means additional maintenance schedules for those in service, and challenges such as engine storage, preservation, and the creation of proactive maintenance plans to allow customers to be ahead of the curve for when times improve.”

If this isn’t enough, engine MROs have had to become ultra-responsive to clients whose normal business practices – based on pre-pandemic business projections – have been thrown into chaos. This includes supporting airlines revising their engine maintenance plans now that corporate revenues have become uncertain with no return predictability anywhere in sight.

“Customer decision-making (has) slowed down as we worked through the new norms and rhythms of demand,” says AAR’s Glover. “What was clear was once they made a decision, we had to be reactive and flexible to support them; whether that be inventory, component repairs or hangar capacity.”

Motivated to Help

The financial health of engine MROs is directly tied to the success of their aircraft owner/operator clients. So it is clearly in the MROs’ self-interest to do everything they can to help owner/operators survive the pandemic.

Engine MROs also want to help their clients during this difficult time because they are all in the same business together; namely aviation, which is as much about the passion of flying as it is the pragmatism of paying the bills. As a result, the motivation that engine MROs feel to assist aircraft owner/operators is genuine.

How these engine MROs are helping varies from company to company. But overall, engine MROs are responding to COVID-19 by learning what their clients are doing to cope and then supporting those efforts.

“Some airlines are concentrating on short-term savings with cash preservation as the main objective, while others are focusing on long-term planning,” observes Martin Friis-Petersen, SVP of MRO Programs with MTU Aero Engines. “MRO providers must flexibly meet both these goals to provide the best solution for customers in today’s market. Further, we have been seeing more of a focus on on-wing/near-wing repairs, smart repairs, smaller workscopes and an increased usage of used serviceable material. This is because MRO decisions have been almost exclusively budget-driven in recent months.”

Pratt & Whitney says they are working closely during this period to advise and assist their customers. “We’re providing guidance and training on engine preservation requirements and supporting return to service operations to minimize any potential issues,” adds Sylvestro. “Through flexible service offerings, we are actively supporting our customers’ fleet planning and maintenance schedule adjustments. Where it makes sense for our customers and Pratt & Whitney, we are assessing contract terms to create more joint value in the long term.”

Meanwhile, “AAR’s MRO network domestically and in Canada is involved in supporting our customers with both short and long-term storage solutions,” says Glover. “Some aircraft have had components removed to support non-stored fleets so this represented some challenges to have component availability.”

GE Aviation says it is focused on being flexible during COVID-19, adjusting its services and procedures as necessary to align with its clients’ adjusted operational strategies. To make this happen, “some activities to support airline and other operator fleets to keep them in the air have changed,” says Hoffmeister. For example, he says, “earlier this year, new guidelines were provided for engine covering solutions when more covers were needed at once globally due to parked aircraft. We’ve also kept our engine preservation and de-preservation recommendations updated. In cases where our customer support teams would normally be on site, we’ve arranged customer virtual training for engine borescope inspections for airline mechanics, which have been well received.”

For any GE engines that have been grounded during COVID-19, GE Aviation field service and customer support teams have been working with aircraft owner/operators to proactively perform maintenance actions related to engine preservation, returning engines to service and complying with Service Bulletins. “The unique challenge, as a result of the pandemic, is the scale and number of impacted commercial aircraft engines at a given time,” Hoffmeister stresses. “To address this, we’ve released “Maintenance Minute” videos with fleet-wide recommendations for mechanics and technicians, and offered tailored virtual training. GE is also prioritizing individual customer questions to provide a quick response.”

All of these changes notwithstanding, the fundamentals of engine MRO service remains the same; namely to keep aircraft engines properly maintained and overhauled in accordance with their manufacturers’ guidelines. So despite the unique adjustments made by MROs to better serve their clients during COVID-19, “our global base of clients are primarily requiring the same services as prior to the pandemic; namely maintenance, repair and overhaul in addition to engine condition trend monitoring (ECTM) support,” says StandardAero’s Poirier. This said, “we have provided engine preservation services to a number of customers who parked their aircraft following the onset of the pandemic earlier this year, and have also provided return to service (RTS) support to those operators who have since resumed flying.”

Restoring Parked Engines to Service

On July 23rd, 2020, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued Emergency Airworthiness Directive AD 2020-16-51 for Boeing 737 NG and Classic aircraft engine bleed air 5th stage check valves. “Corrosion of the engine bleed air 5th stage check valve internal parts during airplane storage may cause the valve to stick in the open position,” said AD 2020-16-51. “If this valve opens normally at takeoff power, it may become stuck in the open position during flight and fail to close when power is reduced at top of descent, resulting in an unrecoverable compressor stall and the inability to restart the engine.”

The AD 2020-61-51 applies to approximately 2,000 U.S.-registered Boeing 737 NG and Classic aircraft that have been in storage. This AD warns that those engines could have corrosion that could lead to a dual-engine failure. Since complying with AD 2020-16-51 requires these 737 owner/operators and inspect these valves before resuming flight, the potential impact on airlines trying to restore pre-pandemic service levels is profound.

Engine MROs like CFM International, a 50-50 joint venture between GE Aviation and Safran Aircraft Engines, is aware of the problem and has been working on it. “This action is related to a Boeing external bleed air valve that interfaces with the engine,” says Hoffmeister. “We are working closely with Boeing in its resolution of this issue.”

CFM International isn’t alone in tackling this issue. “The 5th stage valve topic was one we assisted some of our clients with in both our Amsterdam and New York shops; both are OEM approved for the valve overhaul,” says AAR’s Glover. “We had some other RTS (Return to Service) tasks identified during checks, but are fortunate that most of our customers that we were storing aircraft for are MRO clients who are close to our respective maintenance and engineering groups.”

The fact that these 737s suffered valve corrosion problems is due to so many of these aircraft being unexpectedly grounded on short notice. But even during chaotic events such as COVID-19, this problem is avoidable. “The important thing was for any engine placed into short- or long-term storage to have been prepared properly and this is something that our service team has been able to assist customers with,” says StandardAero’s Poirier. “A key step is to ensure that any exposed gears and bearings are oiled and covered, in order to avoid corrosion from humidity.”

This air valve corrosion issue underlines the importance of proper aircraft maintenance at all times; even during pandemics. “Grounding aircraft for an uncertain period of time and reactivating them, sometimes on very short notice, is a complex task,” says Lufthansa Technik’s Wilken. “Talking specifically about engines, we have created a service package which includes engine care during storage itself like preservations, re-inspections and the rectification of findings but also services during reactivation like engine washes, (doing) any repair work required and engine/module swaps.”

“Additional inspections should be performed on parked and during aircraft transition events,” added MTU’s Friis-Petersen. “As a result, we have seen increased requests for engine services. Upon industry restart, we expect the number of requests to increase further.”

New Opportunities

Like many disruptive events, the impact of COVID-19 upon the aviation industry has opened up new opportunities for engine MROs. “For example, many freighter operators saw very strong demand and almost no interruption in their business,” says Wilken. “Here we were able to attract engine business from these customers.”

Lufthansa Technik is also seeing increased demand for its localized Mobile Engine Services repair station network. With bases in Frankfurt (Germany), Montreal (Canada), Tulsa (USA) and Shenzhen (China), the company can dispatch mobile repair crews to affected aircraft equipped with CFM56-5B/-7B and V2500 engines.

As well, remotely-delivered services are increasingly popular with engine MRO customers. A case in point comes from AAR. “We have seen an increase in demands for remote reporting, digital imagery of components alongside inspections, and engineering reports all in the shared digital space,” says AAR’s Glover.

The same is true for GE Aviation: “Before COVID-19, aircraft and jet engine mechanics would travel to one of GE’s or CFM International’s training centers for hands-on learning,” says GE Aviation’s Hoffmeister. “Now, due to global travel and social distancing restrictions during the outbreak, more training is being delivered to customers on their laptops and mobile phones.”
Starting in July 2020, GE has held a series of webinars to teach customers how to use GE’s and CFM’s self-service customer portals in order to make service requests and share critical data.

Looking Ahead

There’s no two ways about it; COVID-19 has been absolutely brutal to the global aviation industry. And the future is equally uncertain.

“In terms of business, 2020 will be a very bad year; no doubt about that,” says Lufthansa Technik’s Wilken. “The engine MRO sector is suffering overall and will take some time to recover. However, we see ourselves well-prepared to manage this crisis and to get out maybe even stronger than before.”

“The outlook varies by segment and by geographic location. A number of markets have seen little or no impact, with our military and freight/cargo operator base remaining relatively untouched by the downturn,” says StandardAero’s Poirier. “In general, our regional airline operators are in better health than the long-haul segment, and we are hopeful that the industry’s gradual recovery will continue over the coming months and years.”

“As the crisis is on-going and developments in particular regarding travel regulations and restrictions are continually developing, this is hard to predict,” says MTU’s Friis-Petersen. “Generally speaking though, we are seeing the benefits of our flexible #SmartNewNormal approach, have been inducting customers’ engines, and are confident we will recover even stronger from the effects of this crisis.”

“After a period of grounding, it’s good to see some aircraft coming back into service,” agrees Jacqui Sutton, Rolls-Royce’s chief customer officer – Civil Aerospace. “(But) It’s clear that the industry will take several years to recover to pre-COVID-19 levels, but aviation is a resilient industry.”

Whatever happens in the months to come, “we’re keeping close contact with our customers to ensure that we are positioned for when they need us,” says AAR’s Glover. “The road to recovery is anticipated to be a lengthy process beyond the horizon of 2020, so as a company we’re focused on short-, medium- and long-term demands.”

“The aviation services business is driven by aircraft utilization,” concludes GE Aviation’s Hoffmeister. “While it’s too early to predict when the commercial aviation recovery worldwide will happen, there are encouraging early signs of improvement in pockets of the world, such as China.”

With global passenger traffic still reeling from the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s painfully obvious that airlines are going to be postponing aircraft replacements well into 2021 and beyond. That means that the current fleet is going to be extended beyond their operator’s original plans.

As a result of operators putting higher and higher usage demands on their aircraft, nondestructive inspections (NDI) and nondestructive testing (NDT) are going to play an increasingly important role in every phase of airframe and engine maintenance. Keeping one step ahead of critical wear will be key to keeping these aircraft flying and their passengers safe.

With this increasing emphasis on NDI and NDT, the editors at Aviation Maintenance felt it was a good time to contact the FAA to get the agency’s perspective. For NDT industry insights we also talked with aerospace NDT service provider Testia’s (an Airbus Company) chief commercial officer, Teddy Canadas, and marketing manager, Adrian Coronel.

Before we get into the meat of our NDI/NDT Q&A, let’s start by defining what nondestructive inspections and nondestructive testing are.

“The differences between the two concepts may not be easy to see for people outside the professional perimeter of NDT. Let’s put some light on the subject starting from the basics,” Coronel explains. “Nondestructive testing is defined by the American Society for Nondestructive Testing as, ‘The determination of the physical condition of an object without affecting that object’s ability to fulfill its intended function.’”

“Nondestructive inspections define the maximum size of life-limiting defects that could be present at a given time. Inspection requirements are determined by the anticipated service loads, the desired service life, and by the damage tolerance designed into the structure,” he adds. “Thanks to these two definitions we can say that NDT means applying different methods to achieve the physical condition’s determination in a repeatable way. The different methods could be ultrasonic, eddy current, magnetic particles, etc.”

“Nondestructive inspections refers to the act of applying those methods (UT, ET, etc.) to specific specimens following specifics parameters and requirements to detect and measure defects, then report it following a specific procedure to be compliant with regulations,” Coronel concludes.

What, if any, impact has the Southwest Airlines’ engine blade failure had on the FAA’s requirements for NDI/NDT processes and training?

FAA spokesperson:

Operators of CFM International, CFM 56-7B engine models must comply with Airworthiness Directive, AD 2018-26-01 dated Jan 10, 2019. The AD requires a reduced initial inspection interval and a repetitive inspection interval every 1,600 hours of the fan blade dovetail concave and convex sides using Ultrasonic inspections (USI) or Eddy Current inspection (ECI) methods. If a fault is found, the fan blade is replaced prior to further flight. Trained and qualified personnel are required to perform the Ultrasound or Eddy Current Inspections.

Coronel:

The authorities released an Emergency Airworthiness Directive #2018-09-51 on April 20, 2018, that describes procedures for performing an ultrasonic inspection for cracks of the fan blade dovetail and removal of cracked fan blades from service.

Due to this tragedy, the authorities recommended increasing the frequency of inspections, but they didn’t suggest any changes to the procedure or parameters, which makes us conclude that the processes and training are still considered sufficient to ensure safety.

How have the FAA’s requirements for NDI/NDT training and facility authorization/approvals changed over the past five years?

FAA spokesperson:

The FAA’s requirements for NDI/NDT training and facility authorization/approvals have not changed very much over the past five years. While regulations do not specifically define requirements for organizations that accomplish NDIs, multiple regulations that have been in place (e.g., Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, § 121.375 and part 145, § 145.163) require certificate holders to have training programs to ensure that employees who perform maintenance/inspections are trained and qualified.

Additionally, per § 121.367, a certificate holder must ensure that it provides competent personnel and adequate facilities to properly perform maintenance. There is no specific national standard in the United States for NDI/NDT training; however, there are industry and international standards acceptable to the FAA that are used to establish training programs.

Coronel:

It is very difficult to make an assessment on the topic, because aerospace regulations and procedures are constantly evolving over the years. Once this context is set up, we would say that the NDT training and approvals are always at the very edge of the NDT “state of the art”, which means that the knowledge transmitted and the technologic infrastructure to train new inspectors is considered updated and sufficient by authorities. Let’s not forget that all activity is under close oversight of international authorities (ICAO), national authorities (FAA, EASA), local authorities, and NDT associations like ASNT.

As evidence of this, you can consult the FAA Memo “Qualification standards for nondestructive testing” issued on 6/2007 by AIR-200, AFS-300, The National Resource Specialist for Nondestructive Testing and the Chief Scientific and Technical Advisor for Nondestructive Evaluation.

Will the recent long-term grounding of so many of the world’s commercial aircraft have any impact on the FAA’s requirements for more frequent nondestructive inspections of critical airframe and engine components?

FAA spokesperson:

Air Carrier airplanes, affected by long term grounding orders, are placed in a preservation/storage program that requires numerous tasks that protect the airplane from environmental conditions and damage while not in service. When an airplane is brought out of a preservation/storage program, another series of de-preservation tasks are performed to prepare the airplane for its return to service and airworthiness requirements.

The only time an NDI/NDT would be performed prior to return to service is if an NDI/NDT inspection task is due or past due and the particular NDI/NDT inspection is required to be accomplished prior to the airplane’s return to service in an airworthy condition.

Coronel:

Not at all, in fact, the approach is in the other way around. FAA issued a document called, “Flexibilities for Managing Scheduled Maintenance Requirements Due to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency.” It describes how operators subjected to a Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP) can request short-term escalations (STE) to gain flexibility to manage the scheduled maintenance intervals, while continuing to ensure the airworthiness of the aircraft. The FAA only provides STE authorization to CAMP operators through the issuance of an Operations Specification (OpSpec) or Management specification (MSpec).

Operators who are authorized to exercise STEs are able to use short-term escalation procedures to extend maintenance intervals temporarily for aircraft, powerplant, systems, or other selected items. They may request Principal Inspector (PI) approval to be able to exceed certain limitations of their current STE program if needed.

In short, this means that all operators can alter their maintenance & inspection program in maximum of 30-percent of the current schedule and this cannot be applicable on a fleet-wide basis. It is only applicable case-by-case. So, there is no evidence of FAA asking operators for more frequent nondestructive inspection different from the already stated in maintenance documentation.

With the growing use of 3D printed parts in aviation, how has the FAA amended NDI/NDT guidelines for these new-generation parts?

FAA spokesperson:

The FAA is working with industry, academia, and other state and federal agencies to develop consent standards for the manufacture, certification, and inspection of additively manufactured parts.

Coronel:

Both authorities [FAA and EASA] are intensively working with Agencies, OEMs, and Tier1suppliers to optimize NDT evaluation techniques to set more certification & qualifications standards. In 2016, the FAA issued a report on the outcomes of a workshop dedicated to Certification/Qualification of AM [additive manufactured] parts.

In one report the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), stated that the current additive manufacturing standards are very limited, and this lack is an industry-wide issue. For instance, NASA requires NDT at the “Raw Part Inspection” step, then once again at the “Final inspection/Acceptance” step.

Quality assurance and NDE procedures were also cited on the report as a significant challenge. Nearnet or finished shapes, complex geometries, and as-built, or even post-processed, surface finishes were all cited as challenges for inspection. Many parts may require sophisticated volume inspections, such as computed tomography, augmented by actual cutups.

In 2019 EASA and FAA organized a workshop to continue this effort. The main outcome regarding NDT, is that it is considered key activity to descript unexpected defects, root cause, detection, and validation of acceptance limits.

To summarize, FAA & EASA are collaborating with main players to review the advances and inspection improvements on a case-by-case basis; while at the same time working to achieve industrial escalation on a safe, traceable all across the industry.

What should an operator look for in a third-party NDI/NDT provider(s)?

FAA spokesperson:

There are five recommended elements used to assess an organization’s ability to perform NDI functions. When choosing a third party NNDI provider, they should look for five elements of the NDI organization. These five elements comprise a systematic NDI evaluation process that can be used to evaluate any NDI organization, from manufacturing to maintenance. Here is a list of those five elements:

Documentation. Documentation pertains to written procedures, processes, specifications, and/or methods that air operators or air agencies use to perform and control NDI activities.

Organization. A corporation or other similar entity established to provide or receive NDI services.

Environment. The general physical condition of the NDI facility (e.g., housekeeping, storage, safety, consumable management, equipment);

Calibration. The process by which an item is checked against a standard.

Training. Training ensures that NDI inspectors are qualified to perform NDIs. An NDI organization should maintain records in order to document the training and retraining of NDI personnel, including the methods used.

These five elements represent the underlying system that an NDI organization needs to have in place for satisfactory NDI operations.

Coronel:

In this context airworthiness and safety are top priorities, so the trusted and certified capabilities would be the first thing to look at. The second one should be global footprint because working with a provider that can reach operators’ international maintenance sites will increase efficiency and savings.

Last but not least, we would recommend looking for full “360-degree” service providers that can inspect, train and provide aero-specific inspection tools. The reason behind is to build turnkey packages that are fully adapted to customer needs. This enables to find the best Make vs. Buy strategy and to introduce significant OPEX & CAPEX savings.

For instance, this is what Testia does by complementing inspectors with combo inspection-tools (like the famous 8-in-1 SmartUE1), tasks-specific tools (like the ThicknessTool bringing 95-percent savings), or Go-NoGo devises (like the CladTool, allowing an A&P to quickly perform a clad inspection without chemicals).

What would you say is the biggest misconception that owner/operators have regarding airframe or engine NDI/NDT practices?

FAA spokesperson:

The biggest misconception that owners/operators have regarding airframe and powerplant NDI practices is that when using a third party contracted service, the responsibility for the airworthiness of the airframes, powerplants, and components have shifted to that third party contracted service performing NDI. It is not the owner/operators who always retain the responsibility for airworthiness.

Canadas:

Probably, the potential lack of awareness about the strategic importance of NDT for business. Would that be for operators or MROs, NDT often comes as a bottleneck. An AOG or an un-expected inspection never comes when we expect it. So, resources are often limited, while many different skills, and tooling have to be maintained to ensure preparedness in case of need.

However, by putting the right strategic attention into this field, maintenance and operations managers can generate both savings and overflow flexibility, through the right balance of subcontracting and inspection devices.

NDT is currently developed, applied, and controlled by authorities by a sufficiency approach. It would be key for operators to see the big picture of NDT by leveraging constant innovations and trusted partners.

This is the DNA of Testia to support this overall approach in many different ways. From the inspection workforce, training, and tools to Research & Development projects. With a constant and uncompromised focus on keeping aircraft flying safely and bringing efficiency to the business.

Tt’s been nearly two years since the tragic crash of Lion Air flight 610, a Boeing 737 MAX airplane that descended into the sea a few minutes after takeoff from Jakarta, Indonesia with 189 souls on board (see graphic showing flight path on page 37). It was the first of two MAX accidents that occurred within a five-month period that prompted the grounding of the hottest selling airliner in the world.

Before the accident, Boeing was riding high with orders for thousands of the jets. Some people now have doubts that the company will recover from the damage to its reputation. Just last month, a Congressional committee released a scathing report that detailed numerous missteps by Boeing and the FAA in the design of the “Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System” — or MCAS — that was added to the 737 series airframe to provide anti-stall movements to compensate for improvements in engine power and aerodynamic efficiency. During the accident, the MCAS received faulty indications from a broken Angle of Attack (AOA) sensor which repeatedly attempted to nose the airplane over after takeoff.

I get it. Assumptions that were made by FAA and Boeing about flight crew response to malfunctions — even though consistent with current industry guidelines — turned out to be incorrect. More shocking to me as an aeronautical engineer is that MCAS was designed to rely on only a single AOA sensor, making it vulnerable to erroneous input. I freely admit that Boeing and FAA must be accountable to a portion of the culpability of this crash.

However, the lessons learned from the equally shocking investigative findings — findings of improper maintenance — have not been heard above the roar of the public’s red meat appetite to rail against the greed and arrogance of a U.S. corporation, and the excessive delegation of FAA certification. Simply put, these lesser-known findings clearly indicate that the Lion Air accident would not have occurred if proper maintenance was performed by the airline, its maintenance provider, and a U.S. repair station.

The Accident and a Foreign Investigation

The flight 610 accident occurred at 6:33 a.m. on a Monday morning in Indonesia, which was Sunday evening for me in Washington DC. The date was October 29, 2018, and I was a couple months away from my planned retirement as the director of FAA’s Accident Investigation Division. When the call came in, I knew it was a big deal. A newly designed U.S. airplane model had crashed on a clear day after the flight crew reported a flight control problem a few minutes after takeoff. The airplane was three months off the factory floor and had logged only 443 total flights at the time of the accident. With an investigation of this magnitude, so much for coasting into retirement.

Because the accident occurred in a foreign country, the NTSB and FAA were only “participants” in the investigation which was led by the Indonesian authorities in accordance with longstanding international protocols. If a country designs, builds or operates and aircraft that crashes in another country’s territory, then the country — in this case the U.S. — has a right to participate in the other country’s investigation so that it can take care of any in-house issues. The U.S. sent a team of 12 investigators led by the NTSB with “advisors” from Boeing, GE Engines and the FAA. I immediately dispatched one of my investigators to serve as the FAA lead advisor, and he was accompanied by an FAA 737 project test pilot.

The recorded ADS-B data of the Flight 610’s track indicated a series of roller coaster maneuvers. Given the pilot’s air traffic transmissions about a flight control problem, it didn’t take long for Boeing and FAA to determine that MCAS was commanding repeated movements of the horizontal stabilizer trim system. MCAS is activated without pilot input and only during manual, flaps up flight. The MCAS function becomes active when the AOA exceeds a threshold based on airspeed and altitude (see graphic above). I was literally getting a crash course on the airplane’s design from the FAA certification engineers, and they were hitting me up for any scrap of information from the accident. Three days after the accident, the FAA issued an Emergency Airworthiness Directive to all 737 MAX operators to immediately shut off the electric stabilizer trim switches should a similar scenario occur. Meanwhile, Boeing promised to fix the software.

Suspicious Maintenance Activity

But, as with all accidents, there was more to the story. The Indonesians immediately interviewed the mechanics who last worked on the airplane, but they did not allow any of the U.S. team to participate in those interviews. Instead, they relayed what the mechanics said. A review of flight and maintenance logs from the accident airplane revealed write-ups from previous flights indicating problems with the altimeter readings and indicated airspeed during the three days leading up the accident.

All the faulty indications occurred on the left (captain’s) side of the cockpit displays. The respective crews wrote them up repeatedly. In between flights, mechanics attempted to resolve the problems. They conducted built-in (BITE) tests, reset circuit breakers, cleaned parts and reconnected electrical plugs. They kept zeroing the fault messages and approving the airplane for revenue flight without determining a root cause. They kept dispatching a faulty aircraft, over and over again, with passengers.

When the flight data recorder was recovered from the sea floor (see graphic), it indicated the pilots took off on one of the flights even though the captain’s airspeed indicator was inoperative at start-up! Lion Air had a spotty record of 11 accidents and incidents since its founding in 1999. Rumors of a deficient safety culture were circulating around the rapidly expanding low-cost air carrier in Indonesia. Unfortunately, the investigation did not delve deeply into these issues.

Replacement of the AOA Sensor

Two days before the final flight, the accident airplane arrived in Bali and the flight crew reported that the airspeed and altitude flags appeared again along with disengagement of the auto throttle. The 737 MAX is equipped with a unit that provides stored system information for maintenance personnel. If a problem is annunciated in the cockpit, a mechanic can access the Onboard Maintenance Function (OMF) to determine the necessary maintenance actions (see graphic this page).

In response to an error message indicating a possible AOA failure, the mechanics in Bali needed to replace the left-side AOA vane on the nose of the airplane (see graphic). However, no spares were in stock, so the mechanic requested one from airline’s Maintenance Control Center in Jakarta. Instead of receiving a new part, he received a used one that was older than the airplane itself. The AOA probe had been reworked at a Part 145 repair station in Florida and shipped to Lion Air one year before. More on that issue later. Still, why not have several new AOA indicators in stock if your airline is purchasing billions of dollars of 737 MAX airplanes?

In the maintenance log in Bali, the company technicians documented the replacement of the AOA vane and completion of a required “installation test” to ensure it was properly calibrated. The test involves deflecting the AOA vane up and down while observing the digital display indication on the Stall Management Yaw Damper (SMYD) computer box in the avionics compartment for each position. While the log indicated that the test was completed, it did not contain the recorded test values that were required to be recorded as per the company’s maintenance procedures. The airplane was buttoned up, passengers were loaded, and the airplane departed Bali for Jakarta.

On the flight to Jakarta, the FDR recorded the value in the left AOA sensor was approximately 21 degrees higher than the right AOA sensor. This discrepancy should have been discovered by the installation test that the mechanic claimed had been performed. As a result of the erroneous AOA input, the airplane’s stick shaker on the captain’s side began to shudder, multiple cockpit annunciators were lit, and the crew struggled to keep the airplane level. They finally shut off the electric trim switches but continued to fly for more than an hour with the stick shaker vibrating. When they landed in Jakarta, they reported a couple of annunciator lights, but did not convey the actual trauma of what occurred during the flight. As a result, mechanics again checked and reset some buttons, and cleared the airplane for the next flight — the accident flight.

What’s Wrong with this Picture?

About two weeks after the crash, NTSB and FAA investigators asked the Indonesians for additional details from the mechanic who said he performed the AOA sensor installation test in Bali. A few hours later, the mechanic provided investigators photographs of the SMYD unit that were purported to be taken during the actual test on the accident airplane as evidence of a satisfactory installation test result. Why would a mechanic take photographs of his maintenance work? And why provide this information so late in the investigation? Something was not right.

I took a look at the pictures and worked with Boeing and FAA engineers as they gleaned information from the digital displays and unit part numbers. The part numbers did not match the accident airplane. The time shown on one of the displays was a time before the arrival of AOA sensor spare part. Investigators confirmed that the photographs of the SMYD units and cockpit displays were not that of the accident aircraft. To my amazement, these facts, which were cited in the final report, garnered very little attention. As a former employee of the DOT Inspector General’s office, I can tell you that someone would be going to jail if something like that happened in the U.S.

The Aftermath and Lessons Not Yet Learned

To add insult to injury, the Florida repair station that provided the faulty AOA sensor utilized several pieces of test equipment that were not specified in the AOA’s Component Maintenance Manual. Additionally, no written instructions were produced to operate the test equipment that was being used. Investigators opined that the improper test equipment could potentially introduce a bias into the AOA probe, a bias of a similar magnitude to that seen on the flight data recorder, if a certain mode switch was inadvertently positioned. It was clear to me that the AOA sensor was improperly calibrated at the FAA-certificated repair station. Enforcement action by FAA’s Flight Standards office followed.

As a result of the Lion Air accident, I stayed on with the FAA a bit longer until the dust settled a bit from the investigation. The final report was issued by the Indonesians a few months later. I retired about two weeks before the second 737 Max accident that occurred in Ethiopia. That investigation is still pending. I have read in the media that a bird strike may have taken out one of the AOA probes on takeoff, prompting the MCAS to fire. Still, I have questions about how that accident occurred given the issuance of the FAA Emergency Airworthiness Directive after Lion Air.

Yes, Boeing and FAA must accept a portion of the culpability for a flawed design. However, accidents are always due to a series of events, like links in a chain (see graphic). In my view, the Lion Air accident exhibited maintenance malpractice that rivaled the Alaska flight 261 accident from 20 years ago that I wrote about in the March 2020 issue of Aviation Maintenance. The similarities with that accident and Lion Air 610 are undeniable. Both airliners plummeted into the sea following the unintended movement of the horizontal stabilizer that was later determined to be a single-point failure.

With Alaska flight 261, the lessons learned about the improper maintenance were plentiful and impactful. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about Lion Air 610 because of the anti-Boeing buzz. If you are reading this article, please allow these lessons to be heard.

Andy Nixon, founder of MRO Insider says their online portal is an easy to use resource for sending your aircraft maintenance/upgrades needs out for quote to multiple facilities at once. Wait a short while and multiple sources could come back with their quote saving much leg work and time.

Then, with quotes in easy-to-compare format, it is simple to weigh the different options available. Nixon says it is imperative that technicians and management be able to compare hard data between quotes and MRO Insider allows this to happen. Service providers pay a subscription fee to have access to the requests for bid.

“Owner/operators can select the aircraft in their fleet, choose which service is needed, specify a timeframe, and can send equipment lists, maintenance tracking documents or photos,” says Nixon. Once submitted, service facilities subscribed to the MRO Insider network are notified of an RFQ (request for quote). They log in and can either request additional information from the owner/operator or submit a quote. Each maintenance facility has a profile page with photos and customer reviews with the main goal of the website being to improve transparency and efficiency in the maintenance quoting process for aircraft owner/operators.

The company launched in 2017 and has grown quickly since then. In February the company announced the registration of more than 500 corporate aircraft on their maintenance quoting marketplace. Think of it like Amazon, where you can search for a particular product and look at numerous options before purchasing, from new to all levels of used and from multiple vendors. Rather than having to make multiple calls to numerous shops to price compare yourself, wait for return calls, ensure work-scopes are the same and then decide, MRO Insider says it does all this with the click of the return key, once the parameters of your job are entered into the request for quote (RFQ).

With quotes in hand, users can follow up with individual companies with further questions. Nixon says the process brings pilots, owners, operators, and MRO providers together and will improve the customer experience.

Nixon, from Michigan, comes from an aviation family. From his great grandfather, to his grandfather – with whom he still flies today – to his cousin who started a kit plane company, it seemed inevitable that he would end up in aviation. He was always more interested in the business side of the industry and says he came up with the idea when he was the director of sales and marketing for Toledo jet. “Basically the whole driving force was, I was quoting work. I was going out and seeing these customers in our area. And I was just getting pummeled with marketing because we didn’t really have a budget. I mean, people were flying over our head to Cleveland!”

The idea he had was to keep smaller facilities who may be better able to service specific needs at an affordable price, “stage front.” “And so that’s how it came about. It is just a way for [them] to get exposure and get a look at customers that we’re driving to the website or the app, that they might not normally be able to reach,” Nixon says. “And, I thought it’d be cool to start my own business,” he laughed at the naivety of the thought, now that he has the work of three years behind him.

“The larger companies, they have 40 salespeople running around. We’re after the people that, you know, have two salespeople that can’t always be out and about,” Nixon says. “The smaller shops sometimes have the ability with personnel and tooling to complete the jobs and their work quality is excellent, but they don’t have any kind of a marketing team and so they’re losing out jobs,” Bischoff says. Bischoff adds, “I think that’s one thing that we’re really providing to shops, is that when they have the capabilities, but they don’t have the front end stuff like a large marketing team, we’re able to help them get those customers. And those customers may even be closer than somebody else they’ve used and they may never have even heard of them.”

In the beginning the company focused on scheduled maintenance. “That was kind of our core business,” Nixon says. The website was basic and didn’t even have hard coding Nixon says. But customers and industry mentors helped the company hone their product. Customers told them they didn’t even have to email and call. “People asked us, ‘Can you just make it ping out to people that are in the area?’ We said sure! That’s the basis of our app for AOG and detailing and parts, is that it’ll broadcast out to anybody in a 300 mile radius,” he says. “Users put in a description and boom, there it goes. So we let the market determine what’s priced, basically. We just released a messaging feature in it too, so both parties can communicate kind of like WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger, back and forth with each other. And then at that point, we pretty much step out.” They then ask for a review at the end, again similar to an Amazon review.

Nixon says they keep the process simple and on the up and up. “We don’t do finder’s fees, we don’t do kickbacks, we don’t share customer data. So that’s what really separates us from our competitors.” He adds that they refuse to give out the information which he says “drives a shops nuts. They don’t even have to put in tail number – they put in nicknames because sometimes bigger companies just don’t want people to know who it is [making the RFQ],” Nixon says.

“We really pushed to mobile because everything is going that way. We stripped down from the website and made the app really user friendly,” says Perri Bischoff, director of marketing. “It’s simple. It’s got an easy user interface. We took a lot of feedback from not only shops, and owners and operators, but even other people about what they liked and disliked about apps within other industries. What made them work? What kept them going back to it and using it? And so the app was developed with two years-worth of feedback off the website.”

Some of the feedback the company was getting was about the time spent just chatting with sales people from service providers. “Probably the biggest thing that we hear is, you know, ‘I need this quote, I’ve got six airplanes I’m managing. And the guy wants to tell me about his fishing trip for 45 minutes! And then I don’t get the quote. I’ve got to follow up with them,’” he relays. Operators were saying they couldn’t get quotes the same day and there was a lot of wheel-spinning. “I was dumbfounded that all salesmen didn’t respond the same day and get things done as quickly as possible. And so that was our biggest surprise,” Nixon says and where they focus – getting the answers quickly.

A relatively new use just came up. The scenario was a Citation 10 operator needed to replace or check something on the vertical stabilizer. They needed a scissor lift to do a job. “They did not have a way to get up there. So they pinged out via our app that they were looking for a scissor lift in Austin, at the airport there and they were able to rent it from a 135 operator actually that’s on the field. They don’t do outside maintenance, but they were willing to run it out to them to use it,” Nixon explains. “So that’s just that whole peer-to-peer building this community and trying to help out the operators well as the providers, as much as we can.” After that first success, the company says they will expand this capability.

The company also hopes to add a type of virtual DOM to the service at some point in the future. “We’re going to be doing and ask an expert- type, virtual DOM kind of a thing. Basically, if somebody is AOG or has a question, whether it’s a big time DOM or it’s a part 91 guy that has a chief pilot handling stuff, they can message and reach out to these experts that we’ll have loaded on the app with their picture and description of what air frames are comfortable with,” Nixon explains. “We’re going to be a go to source. You can whip out your phone and ping them and say, Hey, I have this giant inspection coming up on my aircraft. “Is there anything I need to look for, can you help me manage the project? Can you check the invoice when it’s done, all of that stuff will then be available here shortly at their fingertips.”

Asked if the pandemic has impacted their business, Nixon says no. “We’re still a startup company, but we’re up 43 percent from this time last year. So, we’ve had a big increase. And then with the app coming out, we’ve seen business go up. One of our bigger operators, their business went up as a result of COVID. They never stopped flying and they actually increased the number of aircraft they were managing. And so we have had nothing but positive stuff so far happened,” Nixon says.

Nixon is especially pleased when he can help put someone “on the map” as he calls it. For example, he mentioned a small facility in Dallas whose customers rave about them. [The owner] used to work for Bombardier and went off on his own. He does Learjet stuff. His customers rave about him: honest, transparent. But he’s got to get his name and his brand out there. We just got him signed up last week. And so we like discovering those shops,” Nixon says.

The company is also committed to some social issues like encouraging young people to get involved in aviation, potentially working with inmates at local prisons and they have begun a carbon offset tree planting program. They have some property in Northern Michigan a source for ordering oak trees. “Every single RFQ that goes through our website we add to our list of tree planting. This fall we’re going to do a company retreat and we’re all going go plant the trees. At some point we would like to include some of our other shops or operators that want to be a part of that. I think we’re the only people that are hands-on doing something like that in business aviation,” Nixon says.

Nixon feels their only competition is the old mind set of doing things the same old way. “We are definitely competing against the old way of doing things. But, everything is going digital and mobile. And we’re not going to see that go away obviously now, especially with the pandemic,” he believes. He says the pandemic has accelerated the trend.

The company says they don’t want to do away with the relationship aspect of the business, however. “We’re like the conduit to accelerate people’s relationships. We’re not trying to completely replace it. We’re just helping you get there faster,” says Bischoff. This relationship aspect is the impetus for MRO Insider to partner with Wyvern to offer a Q SMS program to smaller shops. “It will be another way for us to validate who’s on our network,” Nixon says of the process. They are working with their first client on this partnership to establish an affordable audit program designed for those smaller shops. “One of our big goals is that everybody will be on this Q SMS. We want everybody to know that if you come to MRO Insider, this is what it is like, it’s a boutique of these vetted shops with top-notch people,” Nixon says.