Tag: Featured Story

Jeff Guzzetti is the president of Guzzetti Aviation Risk Discovery (GuARD), an aviation safety consulting firm that he formed following a 35-year career with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other agencies. During his 18 years at NTSB, Guzzetti was a field investigator, “go-team” engineer and Deputy Director. He then served as an Assistant Inspector General at the Dept. of Transportation and testified before Congress regarding aviation safety audits. In 2014, Guzzetti served as the Director of FAA’s Accident Investigation Division in Washington, DC until his retirement in 2019. He is a graduate of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University with a degree in Aeronautical Engineering and holds a commercial pilot certificate with multi-engine instrument ratings in airplanes, seaplanes and gliders.

The eyewitnesses were enjoying a beautiful Tuesday morning in an upscale subdivision in Sanford, Florida when they noticed a low-flying twin-engine airplane zoom past them. The Cessna model 310R banked sharply to the left before clipping a palm tree, grazing the corner of a home, and tumbling into two more homes before exploding into flames (see graphic next page, lower right).

The date was July 10, 2007. As emergency crews responded to the massive fire in Sanford, I was just arriving at NTSB Headquarters in Washington, D. C. to begin another day as the deputy director for Regional Operations. Meanwhile, veteran investigator Brian Rayner was working off his backlog of general aviation (GA) accident reports at the NTSB’s Eastern Regional Office near Dulles Airport in Northern Virginia. Rayner, with a dozen years of NTSB accident investigation experience along with Army helicopter combat time, was the on-call investigator for the next “launch” if a fatal accident were to occur east of the Mississippi. Sure enough, his phone rang: “We’ve got a Cessna 310 in a house near Orlando,” the NTSB duty officer said. Rayner quickly booked a commercial flight out of Dulles Airport to Orlando for a typical “one-person go-team” launch on what seemed to be another typical GA accident.

But as more information came in, and as thunderstorms closed in on Dulles Airport, plans had changed. Rayner soon realized that he would be assisted by a full go-team whether he liked it or not. He learned that the airplane was registered to the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing (NASCAR) aviation division (see graphic upper right ). Michael Klemm, NASCAR’s most senior pilot with 10,000 flight hours, and Dr. Bruce Kennedy, the organization’s chief medical officer and also a commercial pilot, were killed in the crash. Dr. Kennedy was also the husband of Lesa France Kennedy, the president of the Daytona Speedway and the granddaughter of Bill France Sr. who founded NASCAR in 1947. Three more people were killed on the ground — a mother and her six-month-old son in one house and a four-year-old girl next door. Two other people and their 10-year-old son were seriously burned but survived.

It was decided that Rayner would lead a go-team on this accident, with newly minted NTSB Board Member Robert Sumwalt as its spokesperson. Sumwalt is now the chairman of the NTSB. A former airline captain and corporate aviation manager, Sumwalt was no stranger to aviation safety. But this day would be his first experience as a go-team spokesperson, with Brian Rayner “training” him like so many other board members before. Rayner had my full confidence — he had recently been promoted as a senior air safety investigator and successfully completed a previous investigation of a King Air missed-approach accident that killed 10 people associated with the Hendricks Motorsports NASCAR racing team.

An In-Flight Fire

Sumwalt and the other go-team members were to be flown on an FAA jet from Washington’s National Airport to Sanford, Florida. Rayner was already boarding a commercial flight from National because his Dulles flight had been cancelled due to storms. He was pulled off his flight by airport officials and whisked to the FAA jet to join his go-team. During the flight, Rayner briefed Sumwalt that the NASCAR Cessna 310R accident occurred during a “personal flight” from Daytona Beach with an intended destination of Lakeland, Florida. Ten minutes after departure at their cruise altitude of 6,000 feet, the pilots declared an emergency because of “smoke in the cockpit” and asked to divert to Sanford. The last radio transmission was received less than a minute later and was terminated midsentence with the phrase, “shutoff all radios, elec …”

Upon arrival, Rayner and Sumwalt surveyed the accident site (see top graphic above). Although much of the airplane was destroyed during the postimpact fire, investigators observed soot deposits on airplane parts that were found separate from the main wreckage and thus were not directly exposed to the post-crash fire. The instrument panel deck skin, glare shield and cabin door displayed thermal damage and bubbled paint, consistent with an in-flight fire. Rayner also met with the three FAA inspectors from the local Orlando office who were first to arrive at the scene. He thanked them for quickly picking up all of the pieces of paper that were blowing around the site right after the fiery crash. Fortunately, one of those pages was a maintenance discrepancy sheet dated the day before the accident that described a “smell of electrical components burning.” (see graphic, lower left). Rayner was stunned to see that there was no indication of corrective action for this discrepancy under the right half of the sheet entitled “Maintenance Clearing Action.”

The NTSB identified and interviewed the NASCAR company pilot who flew the accident airplane the previous day. He said he was returning from North Carolina when the weather radar unit went blank and he smelled smoke that was “strong enough where I would have diverted if it had continued.” He said he pulled the circuit breaker that controlled the radar and the smoke went away. After landing, the company pilot complied with all of NASCAR’s established procedures for reporting the airplane discrepancy. He wrote up the problem in the plane’s flight log and filled out a maintenance form. He left the white original in its binder in the airplane, verbally informed the NASCAR maintenance technician of a radar problem and handed the yellow copy of the discrepancy writeup to the director of maintenance (DOM).

Who is In Charge?

The investigation revealed that the discrepancy was briefly discussed in the chief pilot’s office with the DOM and company pilot present; however, neither the DOM or chief pilot took any actions to ensure that the airplane was inspected, modified or grounded. Instead they agreed that ­— even though it had an unresolved discrepancy — the airplane would remain available for the personal flight the next morning. The Chief Pilot telephoned Michael Klemm (the accident pilot) to say that the DOM told him that the Cessna 310R would “be okay,” and that Klemm should not turn the radar on.

The NASCAR mechanic who was primarily responsible for the airplane told investigators that although he did conduct certain tasks to prepare the airplane for flight, he did not examine the discrepancy binder or the radar system problem. He said he tried to confirm that Klemm was aware of the problem but it was dismissed as unimportant. Both pilots accepted the airplane “as is” with a known, unresolved discrepancy. The NTSB would later assert that without examining the weather radar system, and then either removing the airplane from service or placarding the airplane and collaring the circuit breaker, as well as making a maintenance records entry, it was not permissible to fly the airplane under Federal regulations.

Rayner and his team also discovered that NASCAR Aviation’s maintenance discrepancy forms were not serialized, tracked or retained; instead they resided temporarily in the airplanes and in the DOM’s office and were disposed of at irregular intervals. In fact, even though the company pilot handed the yellow copy of the radar discrepancy writeup to the DOM, the DOM was not able to provide it to investigators. Furthermore, NASCAR did not have any formalized means to track the dispatch availability of its airplanes. As a result, the availability of any particular airplane — from an airworthiness standpoint — was neither clearly defined or readily available to anyone. It became clear that the day-to-day practices of NASCAR’s Aviation division deviated from those specified in their SOP, thus depriving them of a systematic approach to ensure that all maintenance discrepancies would be addressed.

While the NTSB could not conclusively determine the origin of the in-flight fire, the evidence suggested that one of the pilots likely reset the radar circuit breaker which would have been consistent with the “Before Starting Engines” checklist. This action would have restored electrical power to the weather radar system’s wiring and resulted in the in-flight fire.

Investigators also examined an exemplar Cessna 310R to aide them in analyzing the soot patterns and determining possible burning scenarios (see graphics above and on following page). A view behind the instrument panel of the similar airplane showed an installation of different types of wire, the different ways that the wires were fastened and how the wiring of different systems can be tied tightly together. Rayner could see how a problem in the wires of one system can affect the wiring of another system or even damage wiring that is upstream of protection that is offered by the circuit breakers. The NTSB also found that existing guidance in manuals provided by GA airplane manufacturers regarding the resetting of circuit breakers often does not consider the cumulative nature of wiring damage and that the removal of power only temporarily stops the progression of such damage.

The Probable Cause and Lessons Learned

As per protocol, I sat next to Rayner at the final NTSB public board meeting in Washington, D. C. to help present the findings of the investigation to Sumwalt and the other four Board Members. Rayner did not disappoint. He and his team — including NTSB maintenance expert Mike Huhn and electrical systems expert Bob Swaim — presented a concise and impactful story about what had led to the tragic accident that took the lives of five people including two children, widowed the granddaughter of the man who founded NASCAR and severely burned a 10-year-old boy (now age 23).

“No action was taken to make sure the aircraft was inspected or grounded,” Rayner told the safety board. “When everyone seems to be in charge, then no one is really in charge.”

I was quoted by a newspaper asserting that “This accident started the day before the crash actually happened.”

For his part, Sumwalt said, “I think it comes down to a lack of leadership. Flight-department management could have prevented this. You’re supposed to be running a professional flight department, not a flying club.” Sumwalt had understood early on the importance of a robust safety management system (SMS) in an aviation operation which would have provided NASCAR with a formal system of risk management and internal oversight. He convinced his fellow board members that had an SMS been in place the accident might have been avoided.

But Rayner and Sumwalt also acknowledged that the NASCAR Aviation had quickly learned and applied the lessons from the accident. Well before the investigation was concluded, and through discussions with Rayner and his team, NASCAR made several substantive changes to their aviation operations including: expanded airplane grounding authority, improved maintenance reporting and tracking methods; revised discrepancy forms, new communications procedures, installation of airplane status boards, revised SOPs, the establishment of an SMS program, and the successful completion of an outside independent audit in compliance with the International Standard for Business Aircraft Operations (IS-BAO).

At the end of the board meeting, the NTSB voted to adopt the probable causes of the accident, which were “the actions and decisions by NASCAR’s corporate aviation division’s management and maintenance personnel to allow the accident airplane to be released for flight with a known and unresolved discrepancy.” The NTSB also cited the improper decision by both pilots to operate the airplane with a “known discrepancy…that likely resulted in an in-flight fire.”

The board also adopted five recommendations related to training and information about circuit breakers and the importance of implementing Safety Management Systems to prevent accidents.

I have been teaching Human Factors (HF) courses for a very long time. And in my more than two decades of training aircraft maintenance personnel both in the United States as well as abroad, a common theme is noticeable — there can be a stigma associated with HF training. Aviation Maintenance Technicians (AMTs) are often put into these classes (sometimes at the last minute) thinking that HF training is “for people who screw up.” And, because of that, many attendees feel that this type of training “doesn’t apply to them.” This attitude can be found in Initial, as well as Recurrent, HF courses. The stigma is certainly understandable. In most cases, course attendees have not been briefed, or given a heads-up, about the real purpose of HF training. So, let’s try to eliminate the stigma and assuage any fears that you are being “sentenced to a class for clutzy mechanics.”

By definition, “Human Factors is a multidisciplinary effort to generate and compile information about human capabilities and limitations and apply that information to equipment, systems, facilities, procedures, jobs, environments, training, staffing and personnel management for safe, comfortable, effective human performance.” (FAA Order 9550.8 Human Factors Policy).

Okay, that’s a good start. The FAA basically wants you to know how different factors can influence you on the job and affect your performance; factors that can cause you to forget things, do wrong things, skip steps, and deviate from procedures. So, yes, the training is there to help you improve your awareness of these factors so that you might think twice about skipping a functional check or not conducting a tool inventory after zipping up an aircraft. Everyone, at every level of the organization, can benefit from HF training. In fact, the error that you do not make (as a result of the HF training) may save hundreds of lives, including your own, or your family’s. HF is certainly not a “class of shame.”

Your instructor knows that you are a consummate professional, not an error-prone employee singled out to serve an HF course sentence. During, and after the course, you will most likely embrace the new attitudes, skills, and knowledge you absorbed. In fact, you may be pleasantly surprised! I’ve had students come into the course with a bad attitude but finish the course with nothing but praise for a “very useful and enjoyable training class.”

In order to get this result, the training needs to be developed using adult learning principles in a facilitative fashion. Too much theory should be avoided. The course should be very interactive and include activities, exercises, and videos (but not too heavy on the videos). Course attendees should know that HF training is a much different experience than any other courses they have sat through before. And when I say “different,” I mean that in the most positive way. It’s all about the soft skills!

But, if the course is so good, why is no one from Management in the class? I’m glad you asked! Well, it’s probably not as much about stigma as it is a general lack of motivation and time management. Managers may believe that they do not need to participate in human factors training because, “We don’t need it, it’s only for mechanics,” “We don’t make mistakes,” or, “We just don’t have the time for this kind of training.” Sound familiar?

Obviously, Managers do make errors. In fact, some of the most vivid aviation accidents have been precipitated by management errors made at the very highest levels of organizations. But even as history repeats itself with bad management decisions leading to accidents, there still appears to be a mindset of “error insulation” for those in management positions (in other words, “it won’t happen to me”). When this type of management attitude permeates an organization, it can have negative consequences. It can negatively affect an organization’s safety culture. Management is not only about making strategic business decisions and watching out for the bottom line—it also serves as a model of safety behavior that is clearly visible to employees at all levels of the organization. Thus, if employees see that Managers are not attending the HF course, then it will certainly diminish the importance of HF training to the AMTs.

Hopefully, this article provided some useful information for those of you who have the HF training stigma and/or fear of the unknown. A well-developed HF course, with an effective facilitator, will be a very good experience for you. And it will also make you a safer employee. Oh, and try to get Management to attend the course. After all, we are all human—and we all make mistakes!

Introduced in the late 1960s as part of airworthiness requirements, the aircraft minimum equipment list (MEL) is a document with a list of aircraft components or systems that may be inoperable for dispatch. Prior to the use of MEL, aircraft dispatch was a topic of negotiation between aircraft operators and regulators. Have things around the aircraft MEL changed since its institutionalization? Can we still rely on non-standardized and reportedly ambiguous guidelines to manage this airworthiness topic under the ever-increasing complexity of modern aircraft and the dynamic environment within they operate? This article provides a summary of the current state of this very important airworthiness matter.

Aircraft manufacturers produce the master minimum equipment list (MMEL), and operators are required to develop their MELs based on the master document. While this approach is acceptable, the complexity of operating modern aircraft systems in diverse environments and mission profiles requires a more systematic approach. In recent years, the MEL has been a topic of discussion for both researchers and aviation professionals, and the reliability of the document has been questioned. In fact, it has been postulated that there is a need for a systematic approach to MEL development and approval.

Several principles govern the justification, approval, and management of the MEL document. Amongst others, the MEL must be more restrictive than the MMEL and must be developed based on the environment the aircraft would be operated. Regardless of the differences in MMEL development and approval process in different regions, acceptability and technical accuracy of the document is checked by the stakeholders (such as safety and airworthiness personnel) involved in the process. They review and analyze the items/equipment listed whilst considering environmental and human factors, the reliability, and acceptable level of safety of each component/system. Figure 1 depicts the MEL development and approval process. During this phase, a thorough analysis is conducted before including a system/component in the list using techniques and tools such as Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). While these tools have proved useful and yield satisfactory outcomes, they are still limited because they are linear and do not consider the interactions between humans and machines.

To understand the current state of this important airworthiness topic and also validate the need for a standardized approach, we reviewed MEL related literature, analyzed safety investigation reports of MEL-related events to detect current practice and issues that can affect the MEL development and use and warranty interventions. Figure 2 provides a summary of the MEL events reviewed. Aircraft dispatch against MEL requirements topped the list at 50%, followed by cases of operating aircraft without an approved MEL at 17%. Also, ambiguous and incomplete MEL-related cases accounted for 21%, while human error/decision making regarding MEL application and management was at 12%. In addition, amongst others, the literature reviewed revealed that:

• A holistic approach is required to streamline the development of a MEL framework and also manage the document.
• An engineer/pilot type-rated on an aircraft does not guarantee the correct interpretation of the aircraft’s MEL.
• There is a need for prior airworthiness experience and MEL compliance training in order to properly apply and manage the MEL.

The aforementioned challenges present an opportunity to conduct further research into MEL. The MEL development process is dynamic and requires a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches that encompass socio-technical and systems engineering principles. This will comprise the basis for a holistic and systematic methodology for MEL development and management.

The full article of this study can be viewed and downloaded for free on the website of the MDPI Aerospace journal at: https://www.mdpi.com/2226-4310/7/1/7. This article belongs to the Special Issue “Civil and Military Airworthiness: Recent Developments and Challenges.”

Travel restrictions imposed due to the coronavirus caused airlines to respond to the unprecedented impact from the pandemic by reducing capacity by 50, 60 even 90 percent in some cases and securely parking hundreds of aircraft at numerous locations around the world. Capacity was cut dramatically by all airlines around the globe, some suspending service altogether. And hits just keep on coming, changing daily, hourly.

American Airlines cut 55,000 flights from its April schedule and could make further cuts into May. In a letter to employees, American Airlines president, Robert Isom said, “In recent days, we have seen unprecedented declines in future bookings and customer demand. This is a crisis unlike any we’ve faced in the past…We are in the fight of our lives.”

Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly put out a video to employees telling them that he would keep them informed but that it was uncertain how long the recovery from the impact would be and adding it was likely “far worse than 9/11 was.”

Delta Air Lines stock lost the cap in its feather as its status from S&P Global Ratings was cut to junk. “The steep decline in airline bookings due to the coronavirus outbreak will sharply reduce Delta Air Lines Inc.’s revenue and cash flow,” S&P said in a statement.

Investor’s Business Daily reports rallies for airline stocks as the $2.2 trillion economic stimulus package was approved. The bill will give $25 billion to U. S. airlines to allow continued payroll obligations to be met, but predictions of hundreds of thousands being laid off is hanging in the balance of what happens next.

Numerous trade groups are calling this the industry’s worst crisis ever. “Global carriers may lose $252 billion in sales this year,” according to International Air Transport Association (IATA).

With each passing day, the health of the airlines weakens. Some analysts say that if the travel restrictions are loosened by May, airlines should have the strength to weather the storm. If the restrictions extend much beyond the summer, more government interventions will be necessary to keep employees on.

The situation is changing so rapidly that IATA’s director general and CEO, Alexandre De Juniac, upped his initial early March prediction “that industry revenues could take a hit of up to $113 billion as a result of what we thought then would be a worst-case scenario,” to “$252 billion loss of passenger revenue — 44 percent down on 2019,” by March 24. “Time is of the essence. Governments cannot take a wait-and-see approach. We have seen how dramatically the situation has deteriorated globally in a very short time. They must act now and decisively,” De Juniac went on to say. “Some of you may wonder why, given the broad economic impact of this crisis, governments should focus on airlines. It is because connectivity is crucial. The world will get through this crisis. And when it does it will need a functioning air transport sector. Without financial relief that is not guaranteed.” The IATA leader said airlines transport about 35 percent of global trade. “Every job in air transport supports another 24 in the travel and tourism value chain, nearly 70 million jobs. Prioritizing air transport, helping airlines financially survive through these dark times, will position the world for the eventual recovery.”

The Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA) says that in addition to asking for relief, they will be beseeching its members to offer every remote technology that provides individuals the same visual acuity as if on premises, in person. This is something the association has been advocating for two years. “There is no reason that industry should come to a grinding halt because an inspector is staying home,” says Sarah MacLeod, executive director. “If the agency ‘refuses’ to accept the offer, we are not above going to congress and the administration to ask why the hell not when states, counties and cities are conducting building and health inspections in such a manner and the executive branch has a clear dictate.”

MacLeod also stresses that the industry needs to make lemons out of lemonade. “Component repair stations are able to catch up on demand, the lack of workforce will not be as severe provided the elder workforce that we have do not become victims of a virus 10% stronger than the flu,” she says. “On the other hand, maintenance providers are a pretty hearty, if not totally healthy, bunch! At any rate, we are also, of course, encouraging members to catch up on training—online/on-demand.” This would allow workers that are forced home to participate at any time. “Additionally, if anyone was slow on upgrading manuals or procedures, which in turn could lead to more training, now is the time,” MacLeod says.

Airlines for America (A4A), the industry trade organization for the U.S. airlines, says U.S. carriers need immediate assistance and the current economic environment is not sustainable. The group stresses that the situation is compounded by the fact that the crisis does not appear to have an end in sight. “This is an extremely fluid situation that is evolving rapidly. The rapid spread of COVID-19, along with the government and business-imposed restrictions on air travel, are having an unprecedented and debilitating impact on U.S. airlines,” a statement issued by A4A says. “Carriers have seen a dramatic decline in demand, which is getting worse by the day. Carriers have been forced to remove flights from their schedule and make historic capacity cuts. Cancelations are spiking, and for U.S. carriers those cancelations are outpacing new bookings. The economic impact on U.S. airlines, their employees, travelers and the shipping public is staggering. This crisis hit a previously robust, healthy industry at lightning speed and we remain concerned that the impacts of this crisis will continue to worsen.” A4A President and CEO Nicholas E. Calio says, “This is a today problem, not a tomorrow problem. It requires urgent action.”

Marcel Versteeg, founder of VZM Management Services, cautions in the consultancy’s annual MRO market outlook that “the pandemic could lead to a global recession with unknown timescale.” The report says the impacts of the virus will likely halve the economic growth for 2020. Versteeg still predicts once the crisis is over and the economy rebounds, labor shortages of qualified and experienced aircraft mechanics and technology upgrades will need to be addressed. “Airlines and MROs talk a lot about new technologies, but I am puzzled why so little attention is paid to get the basics right within their organization and empowering their own people,” Versteeg says.

The Boeing Company announced measures the company will take during COVID-19 pandemic to include CEO Dave Calhoun and Board Chairman Larry Kellner forgoing all pay until the end of the year. Boeing also announced a suspension of production operations at its Puget Sound area facilities. “We will keep our employees, customers and supply chain top of mind as we continue to assess the evolving situation,” Calhoun said. “This is an unprecedented time for organizations and communities across the globe.”

Boeing says it will take an orderly approach to restarting production with a focus on safety, quality when the suspension is lifted and considers this a “key step to enabling the aerospace sector to bridge to recovery. The company says it will work closely with its defense and space programs customers in the coming days to develop plans that ensure customers are supported throughout this period. “Critical distribution operations in support of airline, government, and maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) customers will continue,” a company statement says.

Airbus, with facilities around the world, laid out their plans to stay healthy during the pandemic. “Our first priority is protecting people while supporting efforts globally to curb the spread of the coronavirus. We are also safeguarding our business to protect the future of Airbus and to ensure we can return to efficient operations once the situation recovers,” says Guillaume Faury, Airbus CEO. “We have withdrawn our 2020 guidance due to the volatility of the situation. At the same time, we are committed to securing the liquidity of the company at all times through a prudent balance sheet policy. I am convinced that Airbus and the broader aerospace sector will overcome this critical period.”

General Electric says it will lay off about 2,600 employees, or 10 percent of the U.S. workers in its aviation business, another repercussion from the coronavirus crisis and a resulting slowdown in commercial air travel.

FAA is experiencing an increase in COVID-19 cases at air traffic facilities and other offices across the nation and has had to close some control facilities briefly due to diagnoses and exposure concerns. FAA Administrator Steve Dickson voluntarily self-quarantined after a short meeting with Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart just before a House hearing on March 11. Diaz-Balart was diagnosed with COVID-19 and out of an abundance of caution, Dickson quarantined. As we went to press, the top FAA executive and former Delta Air Lines SVP was exhibiting no symptoms. “Our air traffic system is resilient and flexible. Every air traffic control facility in the country has a contingency plan to keep air traffic moving safely when events impede normal operations. In some cases, this means transferring duties to adjacent facilities,” the agency said in a statement.

IATA says their latest analysis shows even if the severe travel restrictions are lifted after three months, the recovery in demand for travel will be weakened by a global recession based on unemployment and consumer confidence and all of this will lead to a slow recovery.

“The airline industry faces its gravest crisis. Within a matter of a few weeks, our previous worst case scenario is looking better than our latest estimates. But without immediate government relief measures, there will not be an industry left standing,” IATA’s de Juniac says.

Although air taxis in the U.S. are still at least a few years off, small commercial drones – remotely controlled unmanned aircraft – have a strong foothold and their repair and maintenance infrastructure is already taking shape. Driving their growth is their versatility – they are entering applications such as cargo delivery, surveillance, agriculture, oil and gas, public safety, construction, insurance, mapping, and logistics.

The FAA has engaged with the unmanned aircraft system (UAS) industry and has given many operators provisional approvals to fly vehicles. As of February 2020, the agency had registered 436,836 commercial drones. Technavio predicts the commercial drone market will reach $20.4 billion by 2024. According to ResearchAndMarkets.com, the drone package delivery sector, alone, is expected to hit $2.1 billion in value by 2023.

As volume expands, drone manufacturers, distributors, traditional maintenance shops, and insurance companies are focusing on the aftermarket. In this nascent industry, however, drone manufacturers are the heavy hitters, as they control the intellectual property and the supply of components necessary for repair and maintenance.

Robotic Skies, a network of more than 190 independently owned and operated Part 145 repair stations worldwide that work on UAS as well as traditional aircraft, boasts strong relationships with high-end UAS manufacturers like the Australian company, Carbonix.

Carbonix says its customers need professional service, low downtime, and exceptional record-keeping from maintenance suppliers. The company says that while it can service local customers, it partnered with Robotic Skies in order for its international customers to have “localized access to expert aviation maintenance, inspection, repair, and upgrade services” and “customized maintenance solutions anywhere in the world.”

At the other end of the spectrum, Drone Nerds, a retailer and wholesaler of commercial and recreational vehicles, boasts aftermarket services such as inspection, repairs, and test flights. Drone Nerds is also a distributor and authorized service center for Chinese drone giant, DJI.

“There will certainly be OEMs that use their own organic depot for warrantied maintenance services, but there will also be operators who will want to stand up their own internal MROs or alternatively use a network of third-party MROs that already service manned aviation today,” says Brian Schettler, senior managing director of Boeing HorizonX Ventures, Boeing’s venture capital arm. Like manned aviation, UAS aviation will have many certified subsystems such as avionics, batteries, and motors. These subsystems will have their own maintenance workflows and like manned aviation, specialty MROs will exist that do nothing but service these very specific subsystems, he predicts.

Boeing HorizonX Ventures led a funding round announced last year supporting Robotic Skies. This “complements Boeing Global Services’ commitment to growing the business aviation and general aviation market segment and demonstrates our continued commitment to creating the infrastructure and lifecycle support for safe autonomous aerial vehicles,” Schettler says. “From a services perspective, we are excited to help our customers explore how best to incorporate aftermarket support for their UAS operations up front, so that we can deliver holistic value from day one of operations.” Boeing is also an active participant in the urban air mobility market (UAM) through its NeXt unit.

Regulatory Landscape

The regulatory system in which drones and air taxis will be operated and maintained is not yet fully defined. Most small (under 55-pound) commercial drones are operated under FAA Part 107, which covers matters such as registration and airmen certification. But the standard currently does not address type certification or continuing airworthiness. The remote pilot in command is responsible for assessing whether the system is in a condition safe for operation. At the same time Part 107 imposes significant operational restrictions. Small commercial drones cannot fly over people, beyond line of sight (BLOS), above 400 feet, or near airports without permission.

But more complex operations ­— advanced by companies like Google Wing and UPS Flight Forward — will provisionally operate under Part 135 with various waivers to Part 107 requirements. It’s complicated, however. Whether or not an operator in FAA’s Integration Pilot Program falls under Part 107, 135, or 91 depends on individual FAA approvals.

“The real market potential lies in UAS built for complex operations beyond the limitations of Part 107,” says Robotic Skies’ president and CEO Brad Hayden. Larger autonomous vehicles, operating beyond-visual-line-of-sight and over people in complex operations, will have regulatory maintenance requirements similar to manned aircraft, he predicts. “Robotic Skies has the aviation experience and infrastructure to support customers who fly under Part 107 or any future regulatory framework,” he says.

In the near term, at least, large cargo drones and air taxis probably will be type-certified under FAA Part 23 and maintained under Part 43, says Erin Rivera, an attorney with Fox Rothschild LLP. The certification process will include the development of maintenance procedures, he says. In addition UAM and cargo drone operations probably will come under Part 135, which includes maintenance requirements, he says.

But, as data collection continues on these new designs, certification standards, and airworthiness criteria, the FAA will most likely — via rulemaking — create a new certification standard just for unmanned aircraft, Hayden predicts. “Thus far, we have not seen any relief from Part 43 requirements, or any maintenance requirements, outside of some parts traceability and record keeping provisions,” he says.

What Will MRO Look Like?

“My theory is that there’s going to be less of a requirement for maintenance compared with typical aircraft because there’ll be more plug and replace,” Rivera says.

Robotic Skies, on the other hand, targets the repair side of the “repair versus replace” equation. High-end systems that can carry heavier payloads are a significant investment, Hayden says. For the safety and ongoing reliability of that investment, formal maintenance programs play a key role. Examples of specialized payloads are LIDAR (pulsed laser) sensors and “Hollywood-grade” cameras, he says.

These vehicles already require scheduled maintenance, Hayden says. “A company isn’t going to spend $80,000 to $100,000 on an aircraft with a short life span.” And it’s not just the aircraft, it’s the whole system, including takeoff-and-capture mechanisms, command-and-control technology, and payload handling. Operators are going to want a continued airworthiness program to extend the life of the assets, he says.

Robotic Skies provides business development services for the new market by identifying UAS operators who need maintenance or repair services and connecting them with the nearest repair station. The company’s software platform, meanwhile, schedules, tracks, and invoices the work.

Many manufacturers have some form of post-sale customer support and understand its importance, but it is a challenge for them to scale that support, Hayden says. It may not be feasible or economical for customers to ship a system back to the factory or the manufacturer may not have the in-house staff to support the volume as its business grows.

“I saw an opportunity for a company to provide turnkey field maintenance services for unmanned aircraft systems that would also give manufacturers and operators a leg up on regulatory compliance,” Hayden says. Robotic Skies provides a way to serve this emerging market using existing channels.

Air Taxis

Air taxis – designed to transport people – will be bigger than today’s 55-pound commercial drones. One question is battery care. Airbus’s Vahana vehicle project, for example, employed two 300-pound lithium ion batteries.

“Initially these things are not going to be repaired – they will be replaced,” Rivera says. They are essentially “big batteries … with a little aircraft around them.” After 1,000 to 2,000 cycles, what’s the value of that aircraft? “We’re going to go away from aircraft that last 30 to 40 years.” And they probably will have fewer overhaul cycles than aircraft today, he adds. Field inspections will be required and maybe some checking and light servicing.

They might be able to take the airframe down to the nuts and bolts, Rivera says, but as battery technology rapidly improves in energy density per size and weight — and if the battery system is 60 percent of aircraft weight — it might make sense to replace the entire vehicle.

These aircraft will be subject to a lot of wear and tear, not based on the number of hours flown, but on the number of takeoff and landing cycles, he says. “Cycles are probably going to be the limitations for parts,” Rivera predicts.

Traditional components such as propellers and gas turbines will follow standard maintenance practices, but a lot of the new electric propulsion systems “will be sent right back to the manufacturers, and they will decide whether to overhaul them internally or scrap and recycle them,” Rivera says. It really depends on cost. Eventually, however, as the industry gathers steam, people from the parts manufacturers will set up repair shops and more will be done in the field, he predicts.

Hayden concedes that some OEMs, for various reasons, might want to keep some maintenance activities in house. Servicing batteries in the field, for example, can be difficult, as it is a new technology. So battery maintenance will depend on how the OEMs want to handle it. Also, more complex vehicles like air taxis may involve a higher level of integration, which means that their maintenance programs, at least initially, may be more challenging and expensive than they would be for better understood and less integrated technologies.

Air taxis will require a more complex support infrastructure. Lithium ion batteries, for example, sometimes experience “thermal runaway,” a condition in which they vent flaming gases. If this happens on a rooftop vertiport, what do you do, asks Rex Alexander, president of Five-Alpha LLC and urban air mobility infrastructure guru. “Do you want to run the risk of having it reignite in an elevator on the way down?” You need a place on the roof to quarantine that vehicle, he says.

“You can do a lot of repairs on a rooftop,” Alexander says. But a lot depends on how much access you have to the elevators to get parts like an entire engine down. And if you’re swapping out batteries at a vertiport, you need a place to store the batteries.

Training

Another tall pole in the tent is technician training. A&Ps, for example, study electrical systems and wiring, but not electric motors, Alexander says. And the battery training piece will be huge, he adds.

The A&P curriculum does not cover electric engines, agrees Terry Palmer, president of Pilot Landing LLC, an aviation consulting firm with a focus on maintenance training. That will be an issue, she predicts. “If you look at electric cars,” for example, getting them maintained reliably is a “huge problem.” A good thing about UAS, she says, is that they can start the safety culture from the beginning.

Robotic Skies has identified training as part of its overall process. It manages the MRO process end-to-end by working with UAS manufacturers to formalize maintenance programs, document inspection, and repair training, Hayden says. The company then deploys and manages the program in the field and provides specialized OEM-certified training to the repair station technicians.

UAS training is unique because it is not just the airframe and powerplant, it is a whole system that can include launch-and-recovery systems, command-and-control technology, and payload handling, he says.

Hayden also heads an ASTM subcommittee looking at the issue of unmanned aircraft technician training. The group is looking at existing ASTM standards to identify gaps between them and what will be needed in the field.

Hayden believes that current technicians – particularly avionics repairmen — will require specific training to address the peculiarities of these unmanned systems, but that their skills and knowledge are highly applicable to UAS. In addition, he foresees a blurring of roles between avionics repairmen, A&Ps, and even ground handlers in the drone/air taxi world. As automation kicks in, for example, who’s going to do the preflight walkaround? Those people may potentially have their own rating and have to be certified.

Avionics systems for air taxis will get much more complicated, especially as they shift to pilotless operations, Alexander says. The parts that people are going to be concerned with are communications, software systems, fly-by-wire control, and electrical systems, Rivera adds. There will be a lot of on-the-job training, he predicts.

Aircraft MRO work is extremely demanding, dirty, and often difficult, but armed with a growing list of new technology hand tools and accessories, today’s technicians can do their jobs better, faster, and safer.

With the rush to go “all-digital” in today’s hangar, it’s easy to overlook just how important basic hand tools, and accessories are in helping an aircraft technician do what they need to do. Especially if it’s the right tool for the job.

Aircraft technicians are an extremely inventive lot and there have been instances where we may have gotten just a bit too creative with our adaptation of “Tool A” to do a “Tool B” job. In fact, an extremely unofficial poll showed that in too many cases, a technician trying to perform a particular task with the wrong tool could lead anywhere from the repair taking longer than it should, to actually causing more damage to the aircraft. Try and explain that to your boss.

It’s not that the manufacturers aren’t working hard to introduce new tools and accessories. From the simplest of safety glasses to extremely sophisticated portable testing devices and scanners, hardly a month passes that some new, innovative, and labor-saving tool isn’t introduced.

Aviation Maintenance magazine has compiled a short-list of some of these new offerings. We hope that some of them will help you work better in 2020.

Perfect Point EDM’s E-drill

At its best, using a hand drill to remove hard-metal fasteners is extremely difficult and time-consuming work. One slip of the drill bit, and you can do thousands of dollars of damage to the airframe section you are repairing. On top of that, all those tiny metal shavings quickly become sources for all types of FOD issues.

With the introduction of its new E-drill, Perfect Point has eliminated all of the inconsistencies, damage, and safety issues associated with hard fastener removal.

“The E-drill is the first hand tool to use EDM (Electro-Discharge Machining) technology to address the process of fastener removal,” explained Jim Becker, Executive Director, Sales and Marketing, Perfect Point EDM Corp. “Pull the trigger and the E-drill’s tubular electrode cuts and separates the head or collar from a hard-metal fastener up to 20-times faster than the conventional hand drill method.”

“As an added benefit, its closed-loop cooling system vacuums up all debris and leaves the cut location clean and cool to the touch,” he said. “In addition, the E-drill’s locational accuracy and ease of use allows for exponential time savings and damage reduction on day one.”

Becker said that the E-drill is not only faster; it’s a lot safer. “The unique alignment tool ensures that the cutter is spot on the fastener, so there is no chance of the cutter slipping and damaging the parent metal or composite structure,” he stated.

For more information visit: www.ppedm.com.

---

Clayton’s Scorpion HEPA Vacuum

You’d be hard-pressed to name an MRO function that doesn’t produce foreign object debris in one form or another. And those various forms of FOD are not only dangerous to the airframe and aircraft systems; many types can be harmful to technicians themselves.

Clayton Associates’ new, ultra-portable pneumatic Scorpion HEPA Vacuum not only does an exceptional job of collecting and filtering debris, its compact size means you can use it in areas that other units can’t reach.

“The Scorpion’s powerful motor easily captures dust and debris, while its true HEPA filter provides exceptional filtration of heavy metal particles like cadmium, hexavalent chromium, lead, and other harmful materials,” stated Brad Clayton, (President), Clayton Associates, Inc. “The exhausted air is clean and contaminant-free, which is a huge benefit when working in enclosed spaces.”

In addition to its uses as a clean-up tool after manufacturing or maintenance, the Scorpion can also be used with a shrouded tool to control dust and debris while sanding, grinding, cutting, or drilling. For vacuum sanding or shrouded tools, the Scorpion features pass-through compressed air, so you’ll only need one air line to power both the tool and the vacuum.

For more information, visit: www.DustlessMadeSimple.com.

---

Platinum Tools’ Slit and Ring Fiber Optic Cable Stripper

It seems like every maintenance task in a modern airplane requires working with some type of cables and buffer tubes: Coaxial, Ethernet, and Fiber Optic – you name it. And when you’re working with fiber optic cables, in particular, cutting, splitting, and terminating, without damaging the delicate optics inside, is challenging. And it’s even more so when you’re in a cramped airframe, cockpit, or avionics bay.

With the ability to quickly slit and ring fiber optic cables ranging from 0.047” (1.2mm) to 2.252” (6.4mm) in diameter, the new Slit and Ring Fiber Cable Stripper from Platinum Tools takes 99-percent of the worry out of these types of tasks.

“This compact, easy-to-use cutter takes all of the guesswork out of quickly and accurately slitting and ringing cables, buffer tubes, and jackets on fiber optic cables,” explained John Phillips, Product Manager, Platinum Tools. “The V-block is reversible to be able to securely hold a variety of cable sizes, which makes it easy to slit the jackets without damaging the sensitive fiber cable.”

“In addition, both the slit blade and the ring blades are adjustable, delivering exact strip-cut depths,” he said. “The Slit and Ring Fiber Cable Stripper is also very small and lightweight, making it perfect for one-handed operations in confined spaces throughout an aircraft.”

For more information visit: www.platinumtools.com.

---

Tensitron’s ACX-1 Aircraft Tension Meter

A common problem with today’s aging aircraft fleet is misadjusted control cables. That issue can lead to a long list of problems with the aircraft’s trim, flight controls, and autopilot system. Unfortunately, with many gauges, the act of checking tension is a lot more labor-intensive than it needs to be.

The new ACX-1 Aircraft Tension Meter from Tensitron, eliminates all of those issues and makes checking control cable tension a simple, “one-handed” operation. The ACX-1 measures a wide range of tension ranges from 0.5 to 1,200 pounds on the commonly used sizes of aircraft cables with the highest degree of digital accuracy.

“The ACX-1 is all digital, so the conversions for millimeters, inches, and CWT diameters are automatic,” stated Liz Koon, Tensitron’s Marketing Manager. “That means there are no conversion charts for the technician to deal with, so it’s a lot faster and accurate. You just turn the power on and select the cable diameter you need to test and engage the meter. The unit does the rest.”

“It also has the option for digital data output. Technicians can select either analog or serial data outputs, enabling them to simply connect the ACX-1 to a computer and download all of the cable tension readings,” she said. “The unit also has a backlit screen, so it’s easy to read when you’re working inside a wing or fuselage.”

For more information, visit: www.tensitron.com/tension-meter/acx-1.

---

Click Bond’s Adhesive-Bonded Fasteners

Today, there’s hardly an airframe modification or repair that doesn’t include new rivetless nutplates, studs, standoffs, cable-tie mounts, brackets, or any number of other adhesive-bonded fasteners. Even with all they do, fasteners are still one of the most under-appreciated tools in any technician’s kit. Yet, having the right fastener can help make any job simpler.

For example, Click Bond’s newest line of adhesive-bonded fasteners includes built-in installation fixtures that ensure more accurate positioning, while providing consistent clamp-up of the bondline during the curing process. These easy-to-use, adhesive-bonded fasteners also eliminate additional rivet holes, preserving structural integrity.

“Having the installation fixture integrated internally within the fastener’s base creates a smaller footprint, which allows the fasteners to be positioned in tighter spaces,” stated Chris Howard, Click Bond’s, Product Marketing Specialist. “Another benefit to the design is the reduced possibility of discarded fixtures accidentally being left in the aircraft, creating more FOD.”

“When using these internally-fixtured parts, installers have no external installation fixtures to remove after curing. This significantly reduces downtime for the aircraft,” he said. “Another benefit is that the overall reduction of plastic waste materials is a step towards making aircraft maintenance more environmentally friendly.”

For more information visit: www.clickbond.com

---

Smith & Wesson Safety Glasses

It’s an unfortunate fact that 90-percent of all OJT eye injuries is preventable by the simple use of approved eyewear. The problem is, many “safety glasses” are either uncomfortable to wear, or their poor optics cause visual distortion.

Smith & Wesson’s line of Safety Glasses eliminates all of these issues. They’re stylish, comfortable, and deliver the highest quality optics.

According to the company, their latest safety glasses are developed to meet all current ANSI Z87.1-plus standards, our family of safety glasses provides maximum eye protection from impact while delivering exceptional optical clarity. Additionally, because comfort is so important, the Smith & Wesson glasses provide a long list of features that let the wearer adjust their fit to their face.

For example, Smith & Wesson’s new Magnum 3G Safety Glasses feature both extendable temples in two sizes and a self-adjusting nose pad to ensure a comfortable, all-day fit. In addition, their cut-to-shape polycarbonate lenses, prevent image distortion, while providing 99.9-percent UAV/UAB/UVC protection.

For more information, visit: www.KCProfessional.com

---

MTI Instrument’s Compact Signal Generator

Aircraft mechanics are often required to troubleshoot sensors, wires, and connectors associated with avionics systems or engine controls. While a basic multi meter can be used to check for power and resistance, MTI Instrument’s new 1510A is a portable function generator simplifies the process. It can quickly simulate the output of various types of sensors allowing the technician to simulate the output of a sensor into the aircraft instrumentation – without the added cost and complexity of running the engines.

One example would be to simulate the output of a vibration sensor that is being reported as faulty. Typically, this task would include mounting accelerometers to an engine casing. When the engine is running, the accelerometers pickup engine vibration and transmit the vibration to a charge amplifier, and then on to a cockpit indicator.

With the MTI 1510A, the tech would simply disconnect the accelerometer at the engine and then inject a suitable charge signal from the unit via the wire harness connector to determine if the accelerometer is faulty or if it’s in the wiring/connector or charge amplifier. All this can be done while the engine is off and cooled down, avoiding running the engine to troubleshoot the problem. It also allows the tech to verify the cockpit indicator and charge amplifier are functioning correctly.

For more information, visit: https://www.mtiinstruments.com

---

Cooperative’s V2500 & CF34 Harness Repairs

CIA&D’s Repair Station now offers repair and overhaul options for the V2500-D5 and CF34-3A & -8E engine harnesses. Major airlines and MROs have come to rely on CIA&D’s FAA Part 145 certified repair center to support CFM56-5A/B/C, CFM56-7B, GE90, CF34-3/8, CF6-80C engine harnesses, and PW4000 QEC harnesses. These P/N additions further enhance service options for our customer’s aircraft and engine wiring harness repair needs.

For more info email: solutions@coopind.com; call: 817-740-4787 or visit: https://coopind.com

Family of Veterans Create New Standard for Grease Gun Storage

Announcing the launch of the Lube Containment Sleeve, a grease gun accessory designed to stop grease drool and prevent contamination. The product officially launched on January 1st, 2020.

Hitting up grease points is on the daily check list for most maintenance technicians. The process is relatively simple: grab the grease gun, lube up the zerk fittings, and either hang the gun back up in tool room or throw it in a tool box. The tricky part comes while the gun is in storage and you have to deal with any grease drool or contamination from dust/dirt.

Grease drool is when the lubricant leaks out of the hose and all over the surrounding area. When seasoned mechanic, Albert Soto, couldn’t find a solution to the grease gun issue– he made one, the Lube Containment Sleeve (LCS). The LSC is a thermoplastic sleeve that slides onto the grease gun coupler, preventing drool and contamination. It attaches onto the hose and stores the coupler inside the cylindrical cavity within the sleeve.

To use the grease gun, slide the sleeve down the hose, away from the coupler. Once the job is complete, it slides back over the coupler and provides instant storage. The design is simple and effective. The company got its start when Soto saw how his technicians used sandwich bags to seal grease guns. He then drew up the design on the back of a napkin and took it to his mother, a seamstress, to create the very first prototype. While the cloth prototype did nothing to seal a grease gun, it was enough for a local engineer to work with and create what we know today as the Lube Containment Sleeve.

The company is currently headquartered in Florida, where they manufacture and ship their product. The team itself comprises of a father and son, both of which got their start in aviation while in the military.

To get these in your shop or to learn more, visit their site at www.StopDrool.com.

Snap-on’s New Spline Zero-Degree Offset Combo Wrenches

The new Spline Zero-Degree Offset Combination Wrenches from Snap-on Industrial feature a uni-directional, zero-degree offset gear design to deliver more power in less lateral space, helping to access and remove the most stubborn fasteners in tight spaces.

The Spline Zero-Degree Offset Combination Wrenches feature ratcheting gears with up to 60 teeth, and work in conjunction with an 8-tooth pawl, which together minimizes swing arc needed to remove fasteners in restricted spaces, such as found in aviation and other industrial applications.

Additional features and benefits of the Spline Zero-Degree Offset Combination Wrenches include:

• Cold-formed gears that use the same proprietary steel found in Snap-on sockets for added toughness and durability
• Flank Drive wrenching system on box-end that generates up to 15-20% more turning power than conventional wrenches, while minimizing risk of tool or fastener damage
• Manufactured from special alloy steel, precision forged and heat treated for optimal strength and durability
• 16 sizes from 7/32” to 1”

There are sixteen sizes of the Spline Zero-Degree Offset Combination Wrenches available. For more information on the Spline Zero-Degree Offset Combination Wrenches from Snap-on visit http://www.snapon.com.

For more information, visit: https://www.mtiinstruments.com.

EvaClean’s Protexus Sprayer Disinfects Efficiently and Effectively

The EvaClean Infection Prevention Program is a fully integrated program using a single chemistry solution throughout the whole cleaning process. The tablets have one set of directions for both cleaning, using the product called PUR:ONE; and disinfecting using PURTABS and the Protexus Sprayer. By combining both the technology and chemistries into one complete solutions package, EvaClean says it allows workers and infection prevention experts to standardize their processes and eliminate many of the training and education challenges faced in programs that still use mops, buckets, wipes, rags, and spray bottles with a multitude of chemistries each with their own unique usage guidelines, dwell times, and safety procedures.

The EvaClean Program is designed to help optimize workflow, simplifies training, and reduces costs, while delivering more predictable and repeatable results that can exceed those of other disinfection and sanitizing programs.

The Protexus electrostatic sprayers disinfect and sanitize around curved and hard-to-reach surfaces, covering up to three times the surface area of a conventional sprayer or mister using the same amount of time and labor.

The electrostatic charge of the sprayer allows the droplets to attract to the surface rather than float in the air, as is typically associated with a mister or fogger. Misters and foggers are associated with worker exposure and respirable concerns. EarthSafe has conducted OSHA and NIOSH third party testing ensuring that there are no safety concerns for acute or long term worker exposure. It was established that exposure levels or PURTABS when sprayed with the Protexus Electrostatic Sprayer fall below established Permissible Exposure Levels (PEL).

EvaClean says that once charged, the sprayer’s battery will run continuously for more than four hours. The battery can be recharged up to 2,000 times. There is an LED light to provide better viewing clarity in dark spaces. A 32oz tank will cover about 800-1,000 square feet dependent on nozzle setting and surface material.

The compatible PURTABS, which work with the sprayer, are effervescent disinfecting and sanitizing tablets that dissolve in water to produce a variety of strengths from the low-level sanitization required for food-contact surfaces, to powerful infection control for C. diff in health care settings. They are compact, concentrated and dissolve quickly in ordinary tap water. They can be mixed in large batches of solution at a cost comparable to that of even commodity bleach, the company says. PURTABS 13.1g is ideal for use with the PX300ES Protexus Backpack Sprayer. They are stable for three days once diluted and stored in a closed container. In an open container, the solution is stable for 24 hours.

For more info go to evaclean.com.

Power Up VDC Power’s PowerFlow-200

The PowerFlow-200 aircraft power supply, by VDC Power, is designed to provide a continuous flow of lab grade power when plugged into a 220 VAC source, and can generally power all aircraft systems, including air conditioning, in a wide variety of aircraft.

Features include a high visibility voltmeter and ammeter to show output in real time and 180-260 VAC single phase input. The unit is small and portable for use away from home base, has an ergonomic top handle and rubber feet to reduce vibration and absorb shocks.

Specifications:

• Input: 26A @ 220VAC
• Wall plug type: Customer Supplied (30A minimum)
• Output: Up to 200A @ 28.5V
• Input cable length: 40′
• Output (to aircraft) cable length: 7′
• Dimensions: 13.625″L x 7.125″W x 11″H
• Weight: 46 lbs. with cables

Go to vdcpower.com for more info.

Airplane Hangar Fall Arrest Systems Designed for Big Jobs

The fall protection system at airport hangars are a large undertaking and need to be expertly installed by fall protection specialists, says Lighthouse Safety. Each worker at the hangar has many concerns. Every job is literally a multi-million dollar project – cleaning, maintaining or repairing hugely expensive jets. The work can be complicated. The footing can be treacherous. It’s all too easy to make safety protection less of a consideration. A strong fall protection system from Lighthouse Safety eliminates this concern. The system is user-friendly and provides full mobility, even in such a large space. Every part of the plane can be safely and efficiently reached. Danger is completely avoided. In an airport hangar — where every job is big and expensive – your best assurance of safety is the guaranteed-effective fall protection services of Lighthouse Safety. Our fall protection experts will before, during and after the project to make sure your workers have the highest possible degree of protection from falls.

Jeff Guzzetti is the president of Guzzetti Aviation Risk Discovery (GuARD), an aviation safety consulting firm that he formed following a 35-year career with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other agencies. During his 18 years at NTSB, Guzzetti was a field investigator, “go-team” engineer and Deputy Director. He then served as an Assistant Inspector General at the Dept. of Transportation and testified before Congress regarding aviation safety audits. In 2014, Guzzetti served as the Director of FAA’s Accident Investigation Division in Washington, DC until his retirement in 2019. He is a graduate of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University with a degree in Aeronautical Engineering and holds a commercial pilot certificate with multi-engine instrument ratings in airplanes, seaplanes and gliders.

Twenty years ago this month I sat quietly in the NTSB’s Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) Laboratory listening to the final 31 minutes of Alaska Airlines flight 261, a McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) MD-83 airplane that had crashed off the coast of Ventura, California. Assigned to lead the “Systems Group” for the NTSB go-team, I needed to understand the crew conversations, cockpit alerts and switch clicks related to what we suspected was a horizontal stabilizer trim system failure.

“Folks, we have had a flight-control problem up front here,” first officer Ted Thompson told the passengers over the PA system. Thompson along with Captain Bill Tansky had just pulled out of an uncommanded dive from 31,000 feet to 23,000 feet. “We have a jammed stabilizer and we’re maintaining altitude with difficulty…our intention is to land at Los Angeles,” Thompson radioed to approach control.

Hands clenching my headphones, I listened to the crew talk among themselves, with airline dispatch and to air traffic controllers in an attempt to keep the airplane “kinda stabilized” as they put it. They sounded experienced, calm and professional. But then, nine minutes from the time they recovered from that frightful dive, I heard a “sound of extremely loud noise” as it was described in the CVR transcript. The airplane immediately began another dive — except this time it did not recover. The MD-83 nosed over, rolled inverted, tumbled downward and impacted the Pacific Ocean at 4:21 pm Pacific Time. Eighty-eight people — nearly half of them airline employees and some of their families on vacation — had lost their lives along with Tansky, Thompson and three flight attendants.

After a three-year investigation by civil rights attorneys in Metairie the accident was attributed mostly to maintenance deficiencies that began during a C-check at the airline’s heavy maintenance facility in Oakland, California. As then-Board Member John Goglia wrote in the NTSB final report, “This was a maintenance accident…more pure than any others.”

Piecing Together the Past

Alaska flight 261 departed Puerto Vallarta, Mexico at 1:37 pm on January 31, 2000 destined for San Francisco. While the CVR captured only the last half-hour of the flight, the flight data recorder (FDR) had hundreds of parameters from the entire flight. The data indicated that the airplane climbed normally until 23,400 feet, where the horizontal stabilizer trim system stopped moving, the autopilot disconnected and the climb rate slowed. The aircraft leveled off at the assigned altitude of 31,000 feet. The FDR indicated that the crew flew the airplane manually for over an hour with constant back pressure on the control yoke due to an out-of-trim condition. Upon crossing the Mexican border while tracking north off the coast of San Diego, the CVR began to pick up the crew conversations regarding the “jammed stabilizer” and initial dive.

Like its earlier DC-9 variant, longitudinal trim control for the MD-80 is provided by the 40-foot-wide horizontal stabilizer mounted atop a vertical fin in a “T-tail” configuration. This tail surface is a critical flight control because it provides a constant aerodynamic balancing force and also aids in controlling the airplane’s nose-up and down movement when commanded by the pilots (see graphics 1 & 2). The leading edge of the stabilizer can be raised or lowered as it pivots about a rear hinge point. This movement occurs via an electrical motor that turns a two-foot-long steel “jackscrew” through an aluminum-bronze “acme nut” held fixed within the vertical fin. The internal acme nut threads are 1/8-inch thick and are designed to wear out and be replaced.

Unfortunately, these components that I needed to examine were laying under 200 feet of water. I had to wait as the priorities for recovery were the victims, the flight recorders, and then the tail. Nine days after the accident, the first major piece of wreckage recovered was the horizontal stabilizer by Portland car accident lawyers. The jackscrew assembly was still attached and jutting out awkwardly (see image 3). My group and I were stunned to see that the acme nut was not attached to the jackscrew. Instead we photographed a coiled piece of thin bronze metal wrapped around the jackscrew that looked like a “slinky” (see image 4). A chunk of the vertical fin was brought up next. The acme nut was still attached but its threads were missing! They had been completely worn and stripped out leaving only the “slinky” (see images 5 and 6).

The NTSB formed a “Metallurgy Group” which later determined that the threads inside the acme nut were worn down and incrementally sheared off by the jackscrew prior to the accident. The partial shearing likely caused the stabilizer to jam during climbout from Mexico but then the nut threads let loose when the crew attempted to operate the trim again which released the jam and allowed the jackscrew to pull up through the acme nut all the way to its bottom stop nut. This caused the stabilizer to pivot upward, thus causing the airplane to pitch down and enter the initial dive (see graphic 7). The stop nut was not designed to hold the aerodynamic tail loads. It broke off nine minutes later, allowing the jackscrew and its attached stabilizer to slide up and out of the acme nut causing the fatal dive. There was nothing that Tansky and Thompson could have done to control the airplane. But why did the acme nut threads fail? It was my job to find out.

The End Play Check

The jackscrew requires an inspection procedure known as the “end play check” to monitor the wear of the acme nut threads without having to remove the jackscrew assembly from the airplane. The procedure involves pulling down on the stabilizer by applying torque to a Boeing “restraining fixture” — essentially a turnbuckle used to change the load on the jackscrew crew from tension to compression. The movement, or end play, between the gap of the acme nut and jackscrew threads is measured with a dial indicator and read in thousandths of an inch (see image 8). A new jackscrew has a gap less than 0.010-inch. Eventually, this gap increases as the acme nut threads wear. If the end play is over 0.040 inch, the $80,000 jackscrew/nut assembly must be replaced

Armed with knowledge of the end play check and the discovery of the “slinky” the FAA issued an emergency directive for all MD-80 operators to inspect their jackscrews and report any findings. Two other airplanes had severely worn acme nuts, both from Alaska Airlines.

The NTSB “Maintenance Group” and my group examined the accident airplane’s records and found that two years earlier, a lead mechanic at the airline’s Oakland maintenance facility had found that the jackscrew end play was worn to its maximum limit of 0.040 inch. He ordered it replaced, but the plane was back in service a few days later with the worn assembly. The mechanic went to federal authorities in late 1998 claiming the airline was cutting back on maintenance and falsifying records to get planes back into operation faster. After the crash, we discovered that the work order had not been acted upon because a second inspection team had “rechecked five times” and “found endplay to be within limits at .033.”

We also discovered that the airline, with no objection from the FAA, was allowed to extend the end play check interval years before the accident (see graphic 9). The original interval was set at every other C-check or 5,000 flight hours. In July 1988, the airline no longer used a flight hour limit rather it based C-checks on calendar time only so that the end play check was being performed every 26 months. Based on the airline’s utilization rate at that time, this equated to 6,400 flight hours between inspections. This interval was increased again in April 1996 to 30 months equating to about 9,550 flight hours under the airline’s accelerated utilization. By contrast, Boeing’s recommended interval was every 30 months or 7,200 flight hours, whichever came first.

The Grease Controversy

Inside the investigation, tensions were running high between Boeing — who designed the jackscrew — and Alaska Airlines — who maintained it. Indications of questionable maintenance were noted, including the fact that the airline was using a newer type of grease on the jackscrew called Aeroshell 33. The grease was green in color and differed from Boeing’s specified grease, Mobilegrease 28, which was red. Three years before the accident, the airline asked Boeing if it could use Aeroshell 33 on the jackscrew. Boeing said it “had no technical objection.” The FAA principal maintenance inspector then approved the airline’s request to switch to the green grease based on no justifying data.

A few months after the accident, Alaska Airlines pointed the finger at Boeing for not only its “single point failure” jackscrew design, but also for the grease that Boeing tacitly approved. The airline was convinced that Aeroshell 33 was causing corrosion. The green grease did appear to be more “wet” to me. But Boeing refuted the claim and inferred that it was more likely the airline did not properly lubricate or check the jackscrew.

To evaluate what role grease played in the accelerated wear of the jackscrew, the NTSB formed a “Grease Group” and conducted standardized tests on both Aeroshell 33 and Mobilgrease 28. The tests also simulated the acme nut wear process by using blocks milled from a scrap acme nut and rings turned from a jackscrew forging. The “block-on-ring” test rigs were lubricated with grease where they made contact. At this contact, the ring slowly wore a divot into the surface of the block. By carefully measuring the divot, we could accurately determine the wear rates for each type of grease and also the rate from using no grease. After months of constant movement back and forth, the tests showed normal wear rates with both grease types. However, only the specimens with no grease mirrored the severe wear rate of the accident airplane.

Properly Greasing a Jackscrew

Over the course of a year I dragged the Systems Group all over the country to observe different maintenance shops perform jackscrew lubrications and end-play checks. We noticed a lot of differences. Many did not apply grease to the entire length of the jackscrew as per the procedure. Some applied grease only through the single “zirk” fitting of the acme nut — we learned that numerous pumps of the grease gun did not provide enough grease on the jackscrew after it was run up and down. We also noted that accessing the area for the lubrication was unwieldy, especially on a tail stand at night (images 10 & 11).

Like the end play check intervals, Alaska Airlines received FAA permission to extend their jackscrew lubrication intervals four times from 1987 to 1996 with no supporting data. The original interval was 500 flight hours (graphic 12). In July 1996, the criteria was changed to 8 calendar months which equated to 2,550 flight hours. An FAA inspector who reviewed the 1996 extension said that the airline presented only Boeing’s recently extended lube interval as justification. The NTSB believed that this was inappropriate because each airline operates their airplanes under unique circumstances that require unique FAA oversight and data justification regardless of the manufacturer’s recommended intervals.

The Probable Cause and the Emergence of a Safer Airline

Nearly three years after the accident the NTSB determined that the probable cause of the flight 261 tragedy was “a loss of airplane pitch control resulting from the in-flight failure of the horizontal stabilizer trim system jackscrew assembly’s acme nut threads” due to “excessive wear resulting from Alaska Airlines’ insufficient lubrication of the jackscrew assembly.” The Board also ruled that factors contributing to the accident were the airline’s “extended lubrication interval and the FAA approval of that extension, which increased the likelihood that a missed or inadequate lubrication would result in excessive wear of the acme nut threads.” The same was cited for the airline’s extended end play check interval which “allowed the excessive wear of the acme nut threads to progress to failure without the opportunity for detection.” Boeing also was cited as a factor due to the absence of a “fail-safe mechanism to prevent the catastrophic effects of total acme nut thread loss.”

It is clear is that the events of January 31, 2000, forever changed Alaska Airlines, making it a different airline than the one that existed on that day. It aggressively took action to improve itself by hiring a new vice president (VP) of safety who reported directly to the CEO, filling executive vacancies in safety and maintenance, creating a large safety office, hiring 130 new mechanics, revising its general maintenance manual and reviewing every C-check aircraft in the fleet to ensure that all work was properly performed. The airline continued to assess its own safety culture and leadership through the years in what became an obsession to improve safety.

This past January, to honor the victims of flight 261 on its 20th anniversary, hundreds of family members, friends and loved ones came together in Ventura around the Memorial Sundial constructed after the crash. The CEO of Alaska Airlines, Brad Tilden, joined them and read a public apology to the families on behalf of the airline. “The tragedy of 261 forced us to change,” he said. “It forced us to be better…we will always work to hold our company to the highest standard of safety…as a legacy to those who lost their lives.” A few days before the gathering, Alaska was rated as the safest major airline in the U.S. by AirlinesRatings. Talk about lessons learned!

If you are unemployed and looking for full time employment, you are having the challenge of your business life right now.

In this unprecedented pandemic, people are stressed, confused, worried, perplexed and in various stages of emotional overload while the daily influx of more bad news continues. And they are worried about losing their job as well.

So, is there good news here, you say? Yes.

There are many things that you can implement to influence your odds and impact in securing job interviews and the attention of hiring managers that are distracted and in crisis management mode. It will be a bigger challenge to secure interviews, let’s be very clear, but you have the power and time to make changes that will help increase your job search effectiveness.

How do you get the attention of hiring managers in this crisis?

How do you demonstrate you are the person to hire over the others?

How do you find the jobs other than applying to only the posted jobs?

How do you tap into the next level of your network to leverage job leads?

How do you explain your reasons for your job loss/job changes effectively?

Here are some critical considerations:

1. Prepare for your search to be longer. Don’t take rejections or no return calls personally. It’s a pandemic and people are confused. Acknowledge the hiring manager’s challenges in leading their teams and then share how you have also led/worked in challenging times. Accept, acknowledge, offer help.

2. Review your skills list and experience to demonstrate how you’ve been successful and dependable in other tough situations: 9/11, SARS, Y2K, floods, hurricanes, recessions/depressions, active shooter experiences, etc. Don’t exploit these tragedies but practice talking about what you learned about yourself, how you and your team helped others and stress your resiliency and positive attitude and successes.

3. Be very succinct with your messages, emails and texts. Be specific, polite and ask for a response to insure the person understands exactly what you are looking for.

4. Recruiters will only be so effective. 80% of jobs are thru personal efforts and not search professionals, so commit your time to proactive work to find jobs.

5. LinkedIn profile: If it is not current, you are compromising your job search. Be sure you have a photo of you that shows a confident, pleasant appearance. No cute pictures to be clever. This world is in a state of confusion, look like you are ready to handle the task. Be sure your summary is short, direct and consider asking questions that you can be the solution. Focus your message and profile to attract a person that can hire you. That is the goal. Speak their language and ask them questions that you suspect they are dealing with in their role. Research and phrase your summary to their language.

6. Resume: Content should reflect the energy and consistency of your LI profile.
Customize the content for each job you apply for. Use that industry’s language, address challenges they are facing that you have solved similar problems for.

7. Use LinkedIn to find out and watch what jobs people left and follow the trail to see if that job is still open. Be creative and determined to trace the trail to that job. Don’t only look for posted jobs–that’s where all the competition goes. Target companies that your successful skills and experience will tie back directly to solving a problem quickly. Make a case to them as capitalists why they should meet you–even if they don’t have an immediate opening. Especially right now when layoffs are coming, hiring freezes looming. You have to look like you are worth investing in to have on the team.

8. Pursue calls with people outside of your immediate network. The people closest to you–if they have not led you to a job lead–will not be a viable help. Sorry, it’s true. Support, yes. But will they find you a job lead? Unlikely. Pursue new leaders and companies that you can create a compelling story and leverage your knowledge.

9. Have proof ready to sell yourself. If you have excessive job changes in the last six years for example be prepared to show how you are fixing the flaws in whatever may have created these job changes (i.e. poor decision-making, lack of research on your part, mistaken loyalty, lack of proactive training and professional development, a personal crisis you have turned around, etc.). Show the listener you realize it may be your fault regarding some of the job issues and you are fixing your mistakes. Gather documents to prove your work is great. If you can’t prove it, they won’t believe it or they will make you a low ball offer to protect themselves.

9.5. Prove you are studying your craft every week. What best selling books/seminars/workshops are you viewing right now? You’re not reading anything to improve? Uh-oh. What magazines, TED Talks, LinkedIn Groups are you participating in? What industry associations are you active in? If you can’t show you are urgently, consistently working to improve your sales, marketing, banking, managerial, supply chain, operations skills, how can you expect to demand a great offer or convince a employer you are the best-in-show?

10. Have your references ready at a moment’s notice. If you can’t get a reference from your the company that laid you off or terminated you, this will create problems in getting an offer, let alone an interview. Work hard to insure a reference can be secured.

11. Practice your interview skills. Rehearse, be tough on yourself, test drive your weak answers and be ready to be scrutinized to prove you are the best for the job. If you are not willing to address and accept your the weak parts of your presentation, you job search will continue to be challenged. Seek out a paid professional or coach to prepare you for this critical interview process.

Best of luck, keep a steady path, don’t let up and be self-aware of how you present your skills to a confused world at work.

About the author:

Dr. Russ Riendeau is an award-winning headhunter since 1985, senior partner of New Frontier Search Company and a private pilot. As the author of eleven books on peak performance, sales and leadership topics, he’s also a behavioral psychologist and TEDx presenter. His job search ideas have appeared in 1000s of national media outlets. This is his first pandemic. He can be reached at russriendeau@gmail.com.

A T-shirt definition of the word “helicopter” reads that the aircraft is: “A million parts rotating rapidly around an oil leak waiting for metal fatigue to set in.” While it may be a bit of an exaggeration, there are few machines in the world with so many rapidly spinning components—components that, when they spin erroneously, can cause catastrophic failures. Monitoring these components has been the job of helicopter Health and Usage and Monitoring Systems (HUMS). Born from tragedy over 30 years ago, HUMS has come a long way.

On November 6, 1986, British Airways Helicopters Boeing 234LR Chinook G-BWFC crashed into the North Sea near the Shetland Islands with the loss of 45 passengers and crew when a forward transmission gear failed and synchronization between the forward and aft rotor systems was lost. The crash investigation highlighted the fact that the aircraft lacked the ability to continuously monitor dynamic component performance aside from traditional flight instrumentation. History today tells us that those 45 souls were not lost in vain as this crash was the catalyst for the development of HUMS.

In the cockpit of a helo, fluctuations in oil pressure and an increase in operating temps, or even a chip light could be the sign of a dynamic component that is moments from failure whereas subtle vibrations, undetectable by flight crews and standard flight instrumentation, and possibly not even detectable by legacy maintenance check flight systems, can telegraph a component failure long before pilots would ever need to start emergency procedures. In helicopter aviation, HUMS exists to keep operators and maintainers apprised of aircraft health at previously unattainable levels. This data can not only prevent emergencies, but, in a more immediate service, HUMS saves operating costs by allowing maintainers to identify components that will need replacing with greater lead time allowing the acquisition of parts that leads to shorter down time for the aircraft.

Since first being introduced to larger oil and gas field helicopters in the 1990s, HUMS has only gotten better and better and has found its way into the light/single helo market as well.

New and Improved

Early HUMS systems experienced teething issues. According to Green Power Monitoring Systems (GPMS) co-founder and chief engineer, Eric Bechhoefer, a HUMS manufacturer for light helicopters, early HUMS “were good in concept but clunky in execution. They were heavy, expensive, challenging to use, and prone to false positives. For instance, alerts regarding a possible bearing fault that triggered a main gearbox disassembly, and then turned out to be nothing created mistrust of the system among maintainers.” Today’s GPMS HUMS feature a patented method of signal filtering to reduce false positives as well as proprietary cloud-based algorithms that improve fault detection.

It is important to note that when HUMS is installed, analysis can begin immediately—even without historical data. Kenneth Speaks of HUMS pioneer RMCI says that on their very first installation on a Sikorsky S-70, because of the accuracy of their software algorithms, they were able “to identify issues with the aircraft immediately and not based on data trends.”

Expanded Monitoring

Helicopter manufacturer, Leonardo includes HUMS as standard equipment on all of their new AW Family aircraft. Traditional HUMS systems monitored engine, transmission, gearbox vibration, and rotor track-and-balance, but Leonardo’s latest HUMS has, according to company spokesperson Margaret Rogalski, has “added monitoring capabilities of additional components, such as the swashplate. The system is in an active state of continuous development and improvement which, in addition to updates to the algorithms used by the system to improve the monitoring accuracy and to reduce the false alarms rate, was able to increase the number of components monitored on the AW139 model with the addition of a sensor dedicated to the oil cooler fan monitoring.” Their “real-time HUMS” system sends alerts directly to ground maintenance if issues arise.

Collins Aerospace’s Kevin Hawko shares that their systems have gone way past the original HUMS designs to include monitoring couplings and shafts, determining recommended adjustments for rotor track and balance, verifying engine performance and automated power assurance checks, watching aircraft operating limit exceedances—speed, torque, power, angle of bank, (engine) pressure/temperature—aircraft flight regimes—climbs/descents, angle of bank, rate of turn, altitude, airspeed—cockpit voice/flight data, and aircraft system or airframe sensing (strain, pressure, temp, speed, vibration, etc.).

RMCI’s Speaks says that customers have regularly requested the expansion of traditional HUMS monitoring parameters to include things like in-line fluid debris monitoring and, for one heli-logging specialist, load sensors that not only measure the weight of the slung cargo, but that also records a GPS position and time/date stamp of every load lift and drop. RMCI currently builds and installs HUMS in more than a dozen helicopter types.

Light Helo Market

HUMS was originally envisioned for the heavy helicopters of the oil and gas fields. Also, larger military helicopters, with power to spare, was a natural fit for early HUMS systems that were not always small or lightweight. With decades of HUMS success, builders of today’s light helos are including HUMS in their standard equipment packages and HUMS manufacturers are targeting the light helo market to retrofit in-service aircraft. New technology allows HUMS installers to enjoy the benefits of smaller footprints and lighter-weight systems—always crucial in light helicopters that seem to always be short on space and overweight.

HUMS manufacturer, United Electronic Industries (UEI) installs HUMS on U. S. Air Force helicopters. Illustrating the terrestrial reach of HUMS, they also have systems on city buses with hybrid powerplants. UEI’s Bob Judd shared that the company recently installed a 20 lb. HUMS on Bell UH-1N Huey helicopters “where our system needed to be deployed under the floorboards, in the back cabin and crammed in between various control rods that run under the floor.”

RMCI also targets the light helo market and has a system for MD helicopters weighing in at five lbs. The company, according to Speaks, is looking to provide HUMS to “anyone that flies,” including fixed-wing operators that are looking for power plant monitoring, turboprop gearbox analysis, as well as airframe stress and load monitoring.

GPMS’s Bechhoefer says that their nine lb. light/single helicopter system can be installed by qualified A&P mechanics in 60-80 hours.

Modern Electronics and User Interfaces

Data storage for early 1990’s-vintage HUMS systems was a challenge, but not so today. Rugged solid state drives with exponentially more data storage are widely available and far less expensive than storage of years past. UEI’s UH-1N system uses modern SD data cards and features USB 2.0 ports. Many early HUMS systems, especially in military aircraft, are still using PCMCIA cards for data and many legacy HUMS systems required physical downloading following a sortie. Today’s HUMS can communicate wirelessly through WiFi and GSM (cellular) connections to send data to maintenance facilities, as well as the aircraft’s manufacturer in real time. Additionally, if the aircraft is being flown outside of cellular range, the system can store up to 1000 hours of operating data for later analysis.

Leonardo’s “real time HUMS” introduced recently “allows selected alarms generated during the flight to be immediately sent on ground. The real time analysis performed will allow the preparation of the needed tools for the ground maintenance before the landing of the [aircraft], further reducing the downtime,” according to Rogalski.

Another needed improvement for HUMS was in the user interface world. Original systems downloaded to dedicated desktop computer systems. Today, HUMS data from most systems is available in easy-to-interpret presentations on customer’s smart phones and tablets as well as laptops. With data being sent via cellular networks or satellites, operators and maintainers can literally monitor aircraft from the kitchen table on an iPhone.

Cost Reductions

UEI’s Bob Judd says, “More and more customers are investing the time and cost for extensive HUMS capability now as they realize the upfront cost of a HUMS system can be small relative to the savings in preventive maintenance and lost productivity caused by unpredicted failures.”

Honeywell Aerospace reports that their current customers have shown a 30 percent reduction in flight cancelations, a 20 percent reduction in required test flights and a 5-10 percent reduction in scheduled maintenance. “A low-cost HUMS system is on the roadmap to address system affordability,” Paul Paulson, senior sales manager for HUMS at Honeywell says. “We have been told by some OEMs that they would put HUMS on every aircraft if a lower-cost offering was available, so we’re working to provide that.”

RMCI was able to use HUMS data for a customer to prove that a transmission problem in an aircraft was not caused by the customer’s maintenance, but was traceable back through the aircraft service’s life. This allowed the customer to get a transmission replaced under warranty as opposed to having to pay for a replacement out-of-pocket—a huge savings attributable directly to HUMS monitoring.

Expanded Data Analysis and Fleet Data Analysis

A continuing area of improvement in the HUMS world is in data analysis—especially in realizing the benefits of fleet HUMS data analysis.

When it comes to small operators of light helos, GPMS’s Bechhoefer says, “Maintenance of aircraft is largely done in silos and operators have limited understanding of how other similar aircraft are used or maintained. Could HUMS systems provide more fleet wide data on say, an emerging bearing issue, as well as opportunities for operator to operator collaboration? We think so.”

Airbus’s HUMS combines their Helionix software with their new FlyScan service that provides data analysis for a single ship or entire fleet of aircraft provided directly by Airbus so that an operator does not have to employ HUMS-dedicated personnel.

In a profound example of the benefits of HUMS fleet data analysis, RMCI tells the story of a military customer who, when detecting an anomaly in the data from an aircraft, was considering a world-wide grounding of an entire fleet of combat helicopters. RMCI looked at the collective fleet data and was able to not only identify that only several aircraft were effected by the issue but “we saw that the problem aircraft were in a batch of consecutive serial numbers,” says Speaks, “showing that someone probably had a bad week on the factory floor.” Because RMCI was able to determine that the problem was not a fleet-wide issue, there was no need to ground the fleet.

Todd Vorenkamp is a former U. S. Navy and U. S. Coast Guard aviator who has flown as an aircraft commander in the Boeing CH-46D Seaknight, Sikorsky UH-3H Sea King, Sikorsky MH-60S Knighthawk, and Airbus MH-65C Dolphin helicopters. He is a graduate of the U. S. Merchant Marine Academy and has a Master of Fine Art Photography from the Academy of Art University.

In their highly regulated environment MROs often rely on paper to document compliance to the authorities and job performance to customers. Some paper documents are required by regulators, and paper is the preferred medium of some lessors and customers.

But now environmental as well as business concerns point toward paperless. IATA is calling for paperless transformation while assuring aviation safety, security, and environmental sustainability. Although many leading players have embraced software solutions that boost efficiency and reduce waste, much more can be done.

AAR’s Brian Sartain, senior vice president of repair and engineering services agrees that there is a renewed urgency for MRO businesses to focus on environmental concerns. “Companies and consumers across industries have an increased focus on sustainability,” he says. “Internal digitization and reducing our usage of natural resources like energy, paper and water are important to us, and we have made quite a few strides in our MRO network, particularly.”

U.S. repair stations are a “kind of untapped market” for the software, asserts Pete Sasson, an MRO veteran and software specialist who recently founded PG Air, a software consulting firm. Apart from the rare case of a perfect paper process, it’s advantageous to go paperless no matter what size you are because it drives so many other efficiency improvements, he says.

Bad Wrap?

“Paper-centric processes can be efficient and cost-effective when applied properly,” says Allan Bachan, managing director of MRO operations at the consultancy, ICF. What’s more, electronic and digital methods have their own challenges. Both actually can be more costly and inefficient depending on how they support MRO, he says. “In fact, we have seen digital methods mirror paper processes rather than replace [them] in many instances, thus adding to overall costs and inefficiencies.”

However, MRO AAR says going paperless would increase their efficiency and reduce waste, which are key objectives in their sustainability plan. “The ability to electronically sign off work cards will cut a significant amount of administrative time in MRO operations,” says AAR’s Sartain. “Eliminating the use of paper and other environmentally impactful materials is a priority always.” Sartain says eliminating time in administrating paper will lead to a direct improvement in profitability since more time can be spent working on the aircraft instead of shuffling paper. AAR believes that improvements will be in the 5-10 percent range. MRO Software provider ULTRAMAIN concurs, saying the true benefit of paperless is that MROs won’t need to make the efficiency vs. environment decision. These two things simply go hand in hand.

Most MROs still use paper as the basis for routing work cards and documents that require official sign off for regulatory officials, Sartain says. “We do believe that we can increase our efficiency approximately 10 percent through the elimination of paper work instructions,” he adds.

“Paper centricity in aviation MRO operations continues to be contingent on the need for documented compliance — regulatory, legal, and financial,” agrees Bachan.

“At this point, aviation authorities do not encourage or discourage paperless operations per se, but they most certainly do have regulations pertaining to them and digital records,” says John Stone, vice president of product management, for ULTRAMAIN. “They need to because when the system of record is purely digital, operators and regulators need to know the integrity of the system is uncompromised.”

Historically, paper records were used to route parts through the process, and operators could stamp and record completion. This paper becomes an official maintenance record that needs to be kept in a safe place, explains Alejandro Mayoral, senior vice president, information technology, for StandardAero. Canada’s Form 1 — for release to service — remains a paper requirement by regulation, according to AJW Technique.

In the leased or mortgaged aircraft/engine ecosystem — more than 65 percent of the world’s airplanes and engines — paper is still “the most common data source for maintenance records,” Bachan says. “Cross-border transfers and registrations of aircraft require perusal, audits, and detailed reviews of these records to assess asset worth, airworthiness, and ownership status.” It’s just “an ongoing reality that owners and lessors still need to have ‘dirty fingerprint’ records, which may also be scanned, processed, and managed as digital images,” Bachan says.

Full-cycle and holistic paperless MRO operations are still at least 10 years away, he adds. “Until regulators, lessors, owners, and operators agree on the many supporting protocols, solutions will be confined to select process elements and stakeholders.”

Low-Hanging Fruit

Paper-centered processes can be difficult to scale. Inefficiencies start with the MRO having to print and sort the task cards for its engineers, says ULTAMAIN’s Stone. “This is a big process…sometimes filling rooms full of [boxes of] paper, because the number of task cards is so large.” Task cards include approved checks but also other tasks stemming from service bulletins, airworthiness directives, and engineering orders, as well as deferred maintenance items. “With ULTRAMAIN the entire process is paperless,” Stone says. “Upon receiving electronic pdf task cards from the airline, an MRO using ULTRAMAIN auto ingests them where many thousands of task cards can be auto-scanned very quickly. As part of the scanning/uploading process, ULTRAMAIN separates the data from the rendering of the data where each card becomes data separate from how the pdf card looks.”

Paper can’t be key word-searched and must be stored. It’s very time-consuming, for example, to assess the effectiveness of your maintenance program by reviewing paper records, says Daragh Cunningham, senior director, AMOS Americas. AMOS is developed and maintained by Swiss AviationSoftware, which is owned by Swiss International Airlines and part of the Lufthansa Group.

Completing documentation for paper-based operations can take weeks after the work is done and certifying that all work was accomplished by properly certified and current engineers. “Airlines will not pay without such documentation,” Stone says. “This happens is real time with ULTRAMAIN because it won’t assign work to unqualified staff or accept signoffs from unqualified engineers or inspectors. The audit trail is created as the work is done. Clear, simple, and nonrefutable.”

Historically MRO operations have required a large amount of paper, Mayoral says. “One single component or an engine would have multiple records associated with it, covering logbooks, routers, certificates, inspection records, etc. … Producing, managing, storing, and retrieving [paper documents] are labor-intensive [processes].”

AAR says they are using less paper currently than in years past. “Most MROs are looking at prints and technical documentation through the use of revision-controlled electronic documents instead of printing them out,” according to Sartain. “I think that U. S. airlines and MROs are not as far along in digitization as European MROs due to the costs involved in going paperless and the requirements for regulatory compliance.”

ULTRAMAIN’s Stone says going paperless brings large efficiency gains and related cost savings, which is justification enough for MROs and airlines to switch to paperless operations. “Efficiency goes up, profits goes up, quality goes up, safety goes up, as does customer satisfaction. Regulators are all for systems that improve safety and auditability,” he adds.

Paper Footprint

AAR believes virtually all the tasks that are carried out in the hangar can be digitized, but acknowledges the systems required to make these digital documents official in the eyes of customers and regulatory authorities are quite expensive and difficult to implement. “AAR has digitized delivery of technical documentation and is piloting systems that would enable a completely paperless work package with our customers currently,” Sartain says.

Some aircraft checks require 400 to 500 task cards, involving up to 600 pieces of paper, Sasson says. Multiply those 600 pieces of paper by four or five checks a night, and you’re talking about “reams and reams of paper.” Printing, organizing, binding, and distributing all this paper might take maintenance planners an entire day. Sasson has implemented AMOS maintenance software for several airlines, and is working with cargo carrier, USA Jet, and other airlines and maintenance organizations.

Some paper manuals are low-hanging fruit for electronic conversion, both to streamline processes and reduce waste, Sasson says. The minimum equipment list (MEL) manual, for example, at some airlines might be 1,000 pages long, multiplied by the number of pilots, managers, and directors who need copies.

Managing changes to the massive paper manual can be complicated because it involves both airline operations, which owns and revises it, and maintenance, which also uses it. Every change has to be printed and distributed to maintenance, as well as signed for by that department, so their copy is not found to be out of date when the FAA pays a call.

An airline’s maintenance program manual is also a good candidate for conversion, Sasson says. These manuals — which spell out a carrier’s maintenance procedures — can be “a couple thousand pages long.”

“Paper introduces many inefficiencies,” agrees James Elliott, senior business architect, aerospace & defense, for IFS, the provider of Maintenix MRO software. Examples are “time spent on data entry, inaccurate re-keying of information from paper into the maintenance information system [MIS], and inefficient search and retrieval.”

Elliott asserts that “paper in any process is a bottleneck,” as it is a “single-user medium.” He cites the case of a plane full of passengers that must wait until “the mechanic fills out a paper form, walks it to the cockpit for a captain’s signature, and then returns it to maintenance operations.” The cash and goodwill cost can be significant, he says. The right software can make the entire process digital, faster and even safer.

Duncan Aviation

Although paper is far from the worst ecological issue in the aviation industry, it’s an issue that can be mitigated via software systems that force process redesign.

There are many ways to reduce paper footprint. Bizjet MRO, Duncan Aviation, developed electronic work order and signoff systems back in 2007, says Rich Teel, IT systems and programming manager for the company.

In addition to its business advantages, the software probably saves at least half a million pieces of paper a year, Teel estimates. That’s just counting the work order header pages and associated paperwork for the more than 50,000 work orders the MRO processes every year. The savings are actually much more than that since many other activities now documented in the software previously required paper, he says.

Duncan Aviation also plans to roll out a new version of its work order system that can run on a smart phone, he says. Technicians will be able to document and sign off on their work using phones, instead of having to get out of an airplane and go to a computer terminal, because the new process will not require a badge swipe.

The new system also will allow mechanics at all of the MRO’s satellite locations, as well as its rapid response teams, to sign off on work via their phones. They won’t have to look for a computer that’s hooked up to the company’s network. The new system will allow them to use a browser-based application to communicate with the work order system.

Maintenix

Qantas and Executive Jet Management (EJM), longtime Maintenix customers, are ahead of the paper curve, Elliott says. Qantas has been on board for a decade and Executive Jet Management (EJM), a bizjet charter operator, went live with an FAA-certified solution in 2008.

EJM’s implementation of e-signature translated into environmental as well as business gains. “A typical work order for EJM might be 200 pages long,” Elliott says.

“A mechanic might have to flick through every single page just to identify the open tasks and then make that into a separate list for the next shift. That might take 20-30 minutes and it could be easy to miss things,” he says.

The company estimates that the efficiencies within shift turnover activities alone save up to 10 labor hours each day. It also attributes a 60 percent reduction in work package setup time and nearly $400,000 in yearly labor cost savings to the solution.

AJW Technique

AJW Technique uses around 150 boxes of paper per year, says Sajedah Rustom, CEO. But this has already been reduced significantly, as technician manuals are now electronic. “We would expect potentially a further 30 percent reduction related to future digitization projects,” she says.

The Canadian component MRO recently completed a day-long assessment of shop floor processes — from receiving all the way through the final production process — in order to identify opportunities to go digital and paperless, Rustom says. “I want technicians to spend most of their time touching components and repairing them,” versus doing paperwork. This is an environmental issue but also an efficiency issue, she says.

AJW Technique is looking at technologies such as bar coding, voice recognition, data analytics, and AI to increase efficiencies and reduce paper usage. She expects bar coding to speed up the induction process, for example. Voice recognition could be helpful in initial diagnostics, and AI and more advanced technologies could play a role in areas such as the costing of work — if the same workscopes on the same part types have been performed on a frequent basis. Rustom expects to have made significant progress on the paperless initiative by mid-2020.

Hurdles

Major obstacles to going paperless involve “the vast maturity gaps with technology adoption and readiness in the operator and MRO ecosystems,” Bachan explains. “Practically all [MRO] tasks can potentially be made fully digital” — from source publications through to work instructions and signed-off tasks proving compliance.

“Electronic signature is probably the biggest hurdle,” Sasson says. Because everything is called out in maintenance manuals, adopting e-signature involves a “pretty intensive revision” to the manuals plus regulatory approval. This is manpower-intensive, which makes it difficult for lean-running U.S. MROs. AMOS and Maintenix provide this function.

Another paper-intensive area is OEM documents, Cunningham notes. In the hangar mechanics often print relevant pages from the aircraft maintenance manual (AMM). After a task is completed, that paper has to be thrown out because of AMM revision control. “Mechanics can’t just keep a copy of an AMM section in their pocket” and reuse it another time, he says. OEMs revise manuals frequently, so mechanics have to check the AMM each time they prepare to do anything.

Without a mobile version of the manual, the mechanic has to use paper. You have to print the task card and a 2-10-page section of the AMM. AMOS can be used on any mobile device, he says.

Maintenix also supports maintenance operations, including e-signatures, on mobile devices, Elliott says.

Duncan Aviation’s electronic signoff is essentially an electronic signature, Teel says. The MRO also has a project with CAMP Systems, the maintenance tracking company. “They used to send us hundreds of inspection items required for each job” in paper format, Teel says. The MRO is working on downloading that data electronically into its work order system instead. (A single inspection can involve hundreds of pieces of paper.) So on the MRO side technicians are in effect filling out CAMP’s task cards electronically rather than manually, and the data is being stored in the MRO’s computer systems. Teel estimates this will save at least 300,000 pages of paper a year.

Yet conversion to mobile is not widespread. Recent IFS research on commercial aviation mobility showed that only 17 percent of respondents could access an entire enterprise software suite on a mobile device, Elliott says.

The study results show that overall, only 31 percent of respondents regularly accessed their enterprise software using a mobile device. Of the respondents that stated they could access enterprise software using a mobile device, only 14 percent could access all functionality in this fashion, while the remaining respondents could access some modules of a suite but not others.

AJW Technique is looking at electronic data interchange (EDI) for paperless exchanges of quotes with its customers. The MRO is also reaching out to its supply chain, both the component OEMs and smaller, local suppliers, Rustom says. “It could be something as simple as a data link.” AMOS also enables data exchange between customers and third-party partners, thanks in part to EDI standards defined by IATA.

In all probability, however, some paper will remain. One example is engine logbooks, which need to accompany engines that are sent out to third-party shops, Sasson says.

“There may still be printed information in the form of labels or other types of identification, … which would travel with the components through the maintenance process,” Mayoral adds.

Others point out that viewing AMMs on a mobile device might not be a good experience on a tiny screen, so that printing pages from the manual may remain a common practice.