Search results

FLIGHT OPERATIONS AND ENGINEERING FACILITIES These words are extracts from a statement issued by P.I.A. on 1st March, 1975. Having been to Pakistan as P.I.A.'s guest a year or so later I see no reason to change them.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze real-world flight data of a piston engine training aircraft collected from an internet-based radar service, along with wind data provided by a weather forecast model, and to use such data to design a hybrid electric power system.

The modeling strategy starts from the power demand imposed by a real-world wind-corrected flight profile, where speed and altitude are provided as functions of time, and goes through the calculation of the efficiency of the powertrain components when they meet such demand. Each component of the power system and, in particular, the engine and the propeller, is simulated as a black box with an efficiency depending on the actual working conditions. In the case of hybrid electric power system, the battery charging and discharging processes are simulated with the Shepherd model.

The variability of power demand and fuel consumption for a training aircraft is analyzed by applying the proposed methodology to the Piper PA-28-180 Cherokee, a very popular aircraft used for flight training, air taxi and personal use. The potentiality of hybridization is assessed by analyzing the usage of the engine over more than 90 flights. A tentative sizing of a hybrid electric power system is also proposed. It guarantees a fuel saving of about 5%.

The scientific contribution and the novelty of the investigation are related to the modeling methodology, which takes into account real-world flight conditions, and the application of hybridization to a training aircraft.

This is our report on this first international assembly of Aircraft Maintenance and Engineering, held in Zurich 6th–9th February 1979. This was AIRMEC 79 — and, as was foreseen in our Comment in the January issue, the significance of this innovation among aviation occasions was taken up by thirty‐six countries who sent 276 delegates to the convention, which was supported by the Exhibition, attracting 112 exhibitors from 17 countries. There is every chance that this event will take its place with Farnborough, Paris and Cranfield as a regular feature of the aviation scene and of considerable interest to all engaged in aircraft maintenance. The organisers did announce at the end of that Show that AIRMEC 81 would take place, again in Zurich, in February of that year. And perhaps it is interesting to comment at this stage about the decision to return to Zurich. While it might be said that the event was a success, the fact that the convention was held in a venue separate from the Exhibition, did have some disadvantages and the consensus among the exhibitors was that this did discourage many of the 2260 in attendance from really taking in the Exhibition. Perhaps the only exception to this were the Chinese whose delegation spent almost all of every day in the Exhibition halls, visiting every stand and spending considerable time at each one.

Aircraft maintenance engineer licensing commenced in the United Kingdom in 1919, and in the U.S.A. a few years later, for the good reason it was considered essential to aircraft safety that the persons maintaining aircraft should have a high level of competency. Both States held that it was a function of the State to assess the competency and award the licence, although subsequently there have been some deviations from this principle in the United Kingdom.

A researcher at Northwestern University's McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science (Evanston, Illinois) has developed an X‐ray device that is believed to be the first practical means of detecting corrosion hidden beneath the surface of an aircraft's body. When the “virtual core drill” is positioned against the side of an aircraft, a computer screen shows an image of the layers of metal under the surface of the skin. If one or more of those layers are corroded, the amount of corrosion will be recorded on the screen, to an accuracy of 1/1.000 of an inch. The virtual core drill or, more technically, a Compton backscatter depth profilometer, was invented by Larry Lawson, research scientist at the McCormick School's Centre for Quality Engineering and Failure Prevention. The device sends con‐trolled X‐ray beams through the plane's body and detects those X‐rays that are deflected back at an angle near 90° from each layer. Today, whenever corrosion is detected on aircraft, the section must be dismantled, the layers pulled apart, and a micrometer used to measure the thickness. If the corrosion represents more than 10 per cent. the part must be replaced. The virtual core drill can eliminate the downtime and the damage that occurs when aircraft have to be torn apart for inspection. The new device includes a 200lb scan head, which is attached to the plane using feet shaped like suction cups while supported by a flexible boom mounted on a vehicle resembling a fork‐lift truck. The vehicle moves the scan head up and down the aircraft. The drill is equipped with the most sensitive detector known, the sodium iodide scintillator. The drill provides the same kind of information, layer by layer, as would be provided by cutting a plug out of the aircraft with a core drill, except that the aircraft is undamaged. Radiation exposure also is minimal.

Normalair‐Garrett Ltd., (Stand No. N31) part of the Westland plc Group of Yeovil, Somerset, is exhibiting a wide range of products which demonstrate the company's diverse capabilities in control systems and precision components for the aerospace industry.

THE structure and systems of the Hawker Siddeley 748 were designed with a prior knowledge of the type of inspection that would be required. The result is that structure and assemblies requiring frequent inspection are readily accessible. Where possible, proved components were used with known reliability ratings and this greatly increased the aircraft's serviceability.

According to regulations, aircraft must be in an airworthy condition before they can be operated. To ensure airworthiness, they must be maintained by an approved component maintenance organisation. This study is aimed to identify potential errors that may arise during the final inspection and certification process of aircraft components, categorise them, determine their consequences and quantify the associated risks. Any removed aircraft components must be sent to an approved aircraft component maintenance organisation for further maintenance and issuance of European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Form 1. Thereafter, a final inspection and certification process must be conducted by certifying staff to receive an EASA Form 1. This process is crucial because any errors during this stage can result in the installation of unsafe components in an aircraft.

The Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach (SHERPA) method was used to identify potential errors. This method involved a review of the procedures of three maintenance organisations, individual interviews with ten subject matter experts and a consensus group of 14 certifying staff from different maintenance organisations to achieve the desired results.

In this study, 39 potential errors were identified during the final inspection and certification process. Furthermore, analysis revealed that 48.7% of these issues were attributed to checking errors, making it the most common type of error observed.

This study pinpoints the potential errors in the final inspection and certification of aircraft components. It offers maintenance organisations a roadmap to assess procedures, implement preventive measures and reduce the likelihood of these errors.