Aerospace
Mechanics contaminated Air Force One planes, causing $4 million in damage and threat of fire
According to Airforce Times . Mechanics from Boeing contaminated the oxygen system on a presidential Air Force One aircraft last April, according to an accident investigation board report released Tuesday.
The contamination to the VC-25A — one of two planes that is known as Air Force One when it carries the president — required $4 million in repairs, which Boeing paid for, the March 6 report said. Had it not been corrected, such contamination could have increased the risk of a fire.
The report said that three Boeing mechanics at a plant in Port San Antonio, Texas, used a contaminated regulator and contaminated tools, parts and components while checking the oxygen system for leaks during regular depot maintenance between April 1 and 10, 2016. They also used an unauthorized cleaning procedure while unsuccessfully trying to sanitize the parts, the report said.
To avoid the chances of a fire breaking out, only “oxygen-clean” tools and components — items that have been cleaned in a specific way to remove any residue that could react when coming into contact with oxygen — can be used on the plane’s oxygen system, according to the report.
Once components are oxygen-cleaned, they can only be exposed to the air for a short amount of time — as little as two to five minutes —,before they must be cleaned again and sealed in a protective package, the report states.
One mechanic gave another mechanic tools and parts to work on the plane, and said they were oxygen-clean. But the second mechanic later learned many of those tools and parts hadn’t been properly cleaned and had been exposed to the air too long.
At one point, the report said, the first mechanic gave the second some cleaning solution and said, “Here [is] some cleaning fluid. Do with it what you want. Use it if you want, but I don’t know anything about it.”
The report said the solution could have been used to clean those tools and parts, but none of the three mechanics were trained or authorized in the proper techniques. Two mechanics then cleaned parts in the wrong way, and connected the passenger oxygen system and the medical oxygen system together with the contaminated parts.
The report said the Boeing depot had fallen behind schedule and wasn’t providing enough oversight over its operations. To try to catch up, the depot’s maintainers — including the three maintainers who worked on Air Force One — had been put on mandatory 12-hour shifts beginning in December 2015. The three maintainers were working six to seven days a week — sometimes working without a day off for weeks at a time.
Boeing’s quality assurance also failed to verify the mechanics were conducting the repairs in the correct way but signed off nevertheless.
All three maintainers had been trained on oxygen cleanliness, the report said, but their actions showed they either did not absorb or retain the information. Three weeks before the mishap, one mechanic went through a training course that emphasized this matter, but the report said this mechanic did not remember taking the recertification training, and the mechanic “failed to observe explicit warnings concerning cleanliness.”
Investigators also expressed their concerns about a lack of experience at Boeing’s San Antonio depot. In 2012, Boeing decided to move its heavy maintenance operation for Air Force One from Wichita, Kansas, to San Antonio, but this move meant 172 Boeing personnel wouldn’t meet the required five-year experience requirement. Boeing requested waivers for those 172 employees in February 2015 — including two of the mechanics involved in the oxygen system contamination — and self-assessed those employees’ relative inexperience would be a low risk.
Boeing spokesman Ben Davis said in a Wednesday interview that the company supported the investigation, and that the report accurately described what happened.
“We took swift action to self-report the incident to the Air Force, and we remediated the oxygen system at no cost to the government,” Davis said. “We fully understand the level of responsibility that comes from working on the president’s aircraft, and we’re committed to our partnership with the Air Force to provide the highest standard of support for the VC-25.”
Aerospace
Which is bigger 777x or 787 aircraft ?
The 777X is a new series of the Boeing 777 family and is designed to be larger and more efficient than its predecessor. It features two variants: the 777-8 and the 777-9, being the larger of the two.
The Boeing 777X emerges as the larger sibling within the Boeing family, representing a significant leap forward in both size and efficiency. Comprising two variants, the 777-8 and the 777-9, the latter takes the crown as the larger of the two. With its expansive fuselage and impressive wingspan, the 777X is tailored for long-range journeys and boasts a substantial passenger capacity.
On the other hand, the Boeing 787, affectionately known as the Dreamliner, occupies a niche in the market as a smaller yet formidable aircraft designed for medium to long-range flights. Its distinguishing feature lies in its composite fuselage, a technological marvel that renders it lighter and more fuel-efficient compared to conventional aluminum counterparts. The Boeing 777X is larger than the Boeing 787 aircraft.
When it comes to passenger capacity, the 777-9 reigns supreme, typically accommodating a sizeable contingent of 400-425 passengers in its standard configuration. In contrast, the 787, with its more modest dimensions, typically carries between 240-290 passengers, depending on the variant and layout.
One of the remarkable innovations introduced with the 777X is its folding wingtips, a feature designed to address the logistical challenges of accommodating such a large aircraft in conventional airport gates. These folding wingtips enable the 777X to retract its wings, allowing it to fit into gates designed for smaller aircraft while still reaping the benefits of an extended wingspan during flight, thereby enhancing fuel efficiency and operational flexibility
Aerospace
China Secures Production Certificate for Mass Production of Pilotless eVTOL Aircraft
The first passenger-carrying pilotless electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft in the world, the EH216-S, has received the Production Certificate for its eVTOL aircraft from the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC).
This is a significant milestone for EHang Holdings Limited, the leading UAM technology platform company in the world. This outstanding accomplishment is another big step towards mass manufacturing for the eVTOL aircraft and the ensuing commercial operations, building on the ground-breaking acquisition of the Type Certificate and the Standard Airworthiness Certificate for the EH216-S.
The PC is a crucial certificate that the aircraft maker receives from the CAAC, the country’s aviation authority. By obtaining this certificate, EHang has demonstrated that it has set up a quality management system for mass production that satisfies the airworthiness regulation standards set forth by the CAAC, and the company has been given permission to continue producing mass quantities.
It is also a strong guarantee of the calibre of the goods made by EHang. Raw materials, supplier management, manufacturing organisation, production quality control, aircraft pre-delivery test, after-sales repair and maintenance, etc. are all included in the mass production quality management system for the EH216-S.
To ensure that every aircraft and its components that roll off the production line strictly adhere to the approved type design and safety requirements, the system sets clear guidelines and documentation for every step in the production procedure. This ensures comprehensive traceability and safety control.
Aerospace
Four Airbus A380 Superjumbos lined up to be scrapped
In a strategic move aimed at reclaiming valuable resources from the iconic Airbus A380 aircraft, VAS Aero Services and Dr. Peters Group have announced a significant collaboration.
This partnership marks a milestone in aviation logistics and aftermarket services, with four of these colossal planes slated for teardown and redistribution of used serviceable material (USM).
The venture between VAS Aero Services, renowned for its expertise in aircraft dismantlement, and Dr. Peters Group, a prominent Germany-based investment fund management firm, underscores a commitment to sustainable aviation practices. This isn’t their first foray into scrapping A380s; their successful partnership has already seen the dismantlement of these aircraft, making them pioneers in this niche.
Under the agreement, the latest consignment brings the tally to eight A380s entrusted to VAS by Dr. Peters Group. Managing Director Christian Mailly of Dr. Peters Group emphasized the trust placed in VAS, citing their unparalleled capabilities in dismantlement and aftermarket sales network. It’s a strategic move in response to the growing demand for quality USM parts, particularly with the resurgence in reliance on the A380.
Notably, the teardown process will be carried out at various locations, optimizing the positioning of harvested parts to cater to different markets. While some parts will be positioned in Europe to support operators in the region and the Middle East, others will remain in the Asia-Pacific region. This meticulous strategy ensures efficient access to spare parts, benefiting MROs and airlines across these markets.
The decision to retire these A380s comes at a time when operators are reassessing fleet strategies amidst evolving market dynamics. Despite initial plans for quick retirement due to the emergence of more fuel-efficient alternatives, factors such as a rebound in long-haul demand and delays in new widebody deliveries have prompted operators to reconsider. The A380, with its unique capacity and capabilities, presents a practical solution for short-term capacity management.
Can Airline Seat Cushions Be Used As Life Jackets?
Does airline food have more salt? Here is the answer.
A software error caused grounding the entire airline fleet
Air New Zealand to Introduce Battery-Powered Flights
Which is bigger 777x or 787 aircraft ?
Why Don’t Airplanes Fly Over the Pacific Ocean?
Major setback for India’s Tejas and China’s JF-17 in Argentina’s Fighter Jet Deal
Philippines in Talks to Procure India’s LCH Prachand Helicopter
Airbus and the Antonov An-225: The Best Partnership for Rebuilding the Largest Aircraft
United Airlines Discover Fake engines parts on several aircrafts
The total aircraft orders for Boeing and Airbus at the Dubai Airshow 2023 : Day 5
Indigo’s Latest Milestone: Connecting Australia with 21 New Indian Destinations
Airline Introduces Child-Free Zones On Its long haul flights
American Airlines plane diverted after passenger calls Flight Attendant ‘waiter’
From CEO to Cabin Crew: Lufthansa CEO Works Trip As a Flight Attendant
