June 7, 2023 - No. 023 In This Issue : Analysts: More efficient to build new Boeing 787s than restore them : Hill Found A Cheap Way to Make the F-35 Even Better : The Amazing Aero Engine That Never Flew: The V12 Rolls Royce Crecy : Appleton airport announces major expansion : The B-2 Spirit is back in the air - the nuclear bomber takes to the skies for the first time since December 2022 :Wrong fuel tank cap leads to accident : FAA Activates Online Aircraft Registrations For Individual Owners : Airbus Identifies Heat, Humidity As Causes Of A380 Wing-Spar Cracking Analysts: More efficient to build new Boeing 787s than restore them Following the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) decision to temporarily stop certification of newly built Boeing 787s between May 2021 and August 2022, it is more efficient for Boeing to build new aircraft rather than to restore the stored inventory from that period, analysts have said. Boeing was essentially stopped from delivering new 787s between May 2021 and August 2022, as multiple production issues were discovered on the aircraft. These problems began much earlier, namely in H2 2020, when the FAA began investigating production shortfalls related to the shims that fill the gaps between fuselage sections and the smoothness of the inner fuselage skin. While individually these issues did not pose any danger, the combination of the two could lead to potential structural failures on the 787 Dreamliner. Continuing 787 deliveries Deliveries resumed in August 2022, when the planemaker handed over a 787 to American Airlines (A1G) (AAL) more than a year after its last delivery of the aircraft to a customer. By June 30, 2022, Boeing had approximately 120 Dreamliners in inventory, reducing that number to 115 as of September 30, 2022, the company’s Q2 and Q3 2022 Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) filings demonstrated. According to planespotters.net, the planemaker delivered an additional 12 Dreamliners, 10 of which were more than six months old. During the company’s Q3 2022 earnings call, Brian West, Boeing’s Chief Financial Officer (CFO), stated that “the pace of deliveries from inventory going forward will be based on finishing rework as well as customer fleet planning requirements.” He also added that the manufacturer expects to clear its inventory over the next two years. “We continue to produce at a low rate and will gradually return to five airplanes per month over time. Near term, the supply chain remains a key watch item for 787 production and deliveries. Longer term, with more than 400 airplanes in backlog, we anticipate higher production rates due to the expected wide-body market recovery,” concluded West. Labor shortages throughout the aviation industry But whether Boeing can scale the production and deliveries of the 787 will also depend on other factors, such as labor. “The labor hours to build new 737 MAX are the same as bringing one out of inventory. On the 787, it is more labor efficient to build a new 787 than to bring one out of inventory,” stated Ron Epstein, a Senior Equity Analyst at Bank of America. “This could imply the 787 inventory burn down will take longer than expected,” added Epstein. The main cause of the issue is not a lack of employees at Boeing’s sites, at least according to David Calhoun, the President and CEO of the company. During the same Q3 2022 earnings call, he noted that while the manufacturer is “at a head count level that we think can handle rate increases and all the things that we need inside our own shop,” the challenge will now be to train and integrate 10,000 people that Boeing has brought on. “We have significant training and development programs and investments that are being made as we speak so that we are productive with the introduction of all of these new people,” Calhoun added. Furthermore, the ever-complex supply chain has been suffering as well. “A lot of our constraints with those suppliers that represent constraints are labor-related,” the CEO continued. “We are going to struggle through all year next year,” Calhoun concluded. Meanwhile, Epstein noted during the Defense & Aerospace Report Podcast dated December 4, 2022, that “as we go in 2023 and possibly even 2024, both manufacturers [Airbus and Boeing – ed. note] and defense OEMs [Original Equipment Manufacturers – ed. note] will be plagued by supply chain issues and a lot of that has to do with labor”. “Getting everything back to ‘normal’ this time around is just going to take a lot of time,” Epstein concluded. How Maintainers at Hill Found A Cheap Way to Make the F-35 Even Better HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah—The F-35 stealth fighter took more than 10 years and billions of dollars to develop, but three Airmen at Hill Air Force Base found a way to make it even better with just a 3D printer, some tough plastic, and an inventive spirit. In fact, their invention could save the Air Force millions of dollars and many headaches in the long-term upkeep of its newest fighter. “This has caught a lot of attention here and elsewhere,” one of the maintainers, Staff Sgt. Christopher O’Donnell, told Air & Space Forces Magazine. “Every couple days we’ll get an email or a phone call [from another F-35 base] asking ‘how do we go about doing this?’” The F-35 has a small cluster of sensors on the side of each nose that collects data on air pressure and other factors that can affect the aircraft in flight. When the jet is on the ground, maintainers keep the sensors safe from dust or moisture by covering them a tool that uses rubber seals and quick-release pins to stay in place. The trouble is that the tool, which costs more than $600, is difficult to use, the pins are easily broken, and the rubber seals often fail in hot weather. Maintainers at Hill’s 34th Fighter Generation Squadron wondered if there was a better way to do things, and they knew exactly who to ask for help. “We’re the last line of defense to fix whatever we can and put it back into service so that the military does not have to purchase replacement equipment” said O’Donnell. “In some instances, the equipment is so old that nobody makes it anymore, but it is still needed.” O’Donnell is one of three technicians at Hill’s Air Force Repair Enhancement Program shop, where Airmen conduct homemade repairs or design replacement parts. AFREP shops exist across the country and have saved the branch millions of dollars, especially where older aircraft are stationed. For example, the AFREP shop at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Ariz. has saved about $86 million since 2001 coming up with fixes for the A-10, C-130 and HH-60. When the Hill AFREP office heard about the issues with the F-35 data port covers, they got to work creating one that would be stronger, cheaper and simpler than its predecessor. “We were like ‘let’s keep it as minimal as possible,’” O’Donnell recalled. Instead of a complicated device with pins and seals, the AFREP Airmen 3D-printed a slab of rubber-like plastic that fit perfectly over the sensor cluster. Later they installed magnets and an O-ring to keep the cover fixed in place. The new design stuck on the jet through wind, rain, snow, and hail, keeping the sensors beneath it safe and dry. “No mechanical parts, extremely durable, flexible, and it sticks to the jet,” O’Donnell said. “And the way it fits is universal so it can go on either side of the nose.” Unlike the original part, the new covers cost only about $45 and about 22 hours to make in the shop’s 3D printers, which have been churning out covers for F-35s at Hill and other F-35 bases over the past few months. AFREP can print the covers in a variety of colors and include the squadron symbol of the unit receiving them. The Air Force is currently looking to patent the design. “It will be awesome being able to say that I have a patent in my name,” O’Donnell said. “The Air Force will own the patent and the rights, but our names are credited for coming up with it.” O’Donnell and his AFREP colleagues, Tech Sgts. Justin Platt and James Dover, can see the impact of their work in the form of red data port covers gracing almost every F-35 on the flight line. But that is just one example of the many time- and money-saving fixes the three Airmen have made over the years. Others include a new alarm shutoff switch for Minuteman III launch controls, more durable computer connection boxes for F-22 maintainers, and a homemade device that can detect issues with the diagnostic wires that maintainers plug into F-35s. AFREP Airmen take a course in miniature and microminiature electronic repair, which allows them to solder the small components that keep circuit boards running. “If you pass, you get certified to work on the electronic equipment that goes into the jets or other planes,” O’Donnell said. With those skills, AFREP Airmen can get old equipment like a busted missile control oscilloscope back up and running again. “We don’t want to spend $15,000 on a new oscilloscope,” O’Donnell said. “So I spent a week’s worth of work cleaning the board, putting new copper down, epoxying, and then soldering things back on very gently, and it worked perfectly.” An extra perk of the AFREP program is that it brings in cash for maintenance groups. Platt explained that when a maintenance group fixes a part through AFREP, it can take the money that would have gone towards a replacement part and instead use it to improve the group through capital improvements or new equipment. “The Air Force is still spending the money but they are rewarding it back to themselves,” Platt said. Airmen routinely bring questions and broken gadgets to the Hill AFREP shop, and while some fixes come easy, others may sit on the shelf for years before a solution presents itself. “You never know who’s going to walk in the door with something new,” O’Donnell said. “One day I’m designing something on the computer to 3D print, that afternoon I might be fixing an electrical board, and then later I’m working on something hydraulics-related.” The variety is part of why O’Donnell and Platt enjoy AFREP work. Before coming to the shop, O’Donnell put together bombs as a munitions systems specialist, while Platt worked as a crew chief. Those are difficult jobs, but AFREP presents a new challenge every day. “You get proficient doing the same thing over and over again, but at the same time, it can get tedious,” O’Donnell said. “I want something different, which was great about this shop. Every day it’s something else.” The Amazing Aero Engine That Never Flew: The V12 Rolls Royce Crecy When you hear “WWII aviation engine” and “Rolls Royce” chances are, you immediately think of the venerable Merlin engine. However, there was another engine on the Rolls Royce drawing boards, that had the potential to surpass the Merlin’s success story. So, the question is, if it’s so great and full of potential, why haven’t you ever heard of the Rolls Royce Crecy engine before? Well, that can be explained by a single word: Jets. Unfortunately, the engine’s timeline doomed it to obscurity. Development started in the midst of WWII in 1941 but wasn’t completed until after the war ended. And the reason the experimental program was canceled had nothing to do with its inherent capabilities, but rather because the development of the jet engine took priority. The Crecy’s potential was never even given a chance to prove itself inside of a Supermarine Spitfire cowling, as it was originally intended. Crecy: The Most Advanced Two-Stroke Aero Engine Ever While the title might sound like hyperbole, that is how modern aviation experts describe the Crecy engine. Let’s look at what has everyone so enamored with the engine. It’s a 26.1-liter (1593.4 cubic inch) 90-degree V12 engine. It was a two-stroke, sleeve-valve design that featured direct injection. It had a 5.100-inch bore and a 6.500-inch stroke, with a modest compression ratio of 7.0:1. That was augmented by 15psi from a supercharger (which we need to talk more about later, as it was a really neat design), and allowed the engine to make almost 1,800 horsepower in the testing that was completed. Using reciprocating sleeve valves, the Crecy valves we open-ended allowing for much greater exhaust flow out of the engine; like, a lot more exhaust flow. A neat feature on paper, was that the high-flowing two-stroke exhaust design would allow the engine’s exhaust to provide additional forward thrust to the aircraft, on the order of an additional 30 percent over the propeller. Unlike traditional two-stroke engines, the Crecy used a traditional oiling system. This was thanks to the supercharger forcing the intake charge into the cylinder. The direct injection system allowed a much leaner air-fuel ratio to be achieved, and ignition was handled by dual spark plugs. The Rolls Royce Crecy engine was incredibly advanced for the day. It incorporated a lot of features and technologies that were ahead of the time. Unfortunately, the engine was a victim of timing and circumstance. Getting into the Crecy supercharger system, things got really interesting. The first test engines had adjustable compressor blade angles. This was done to reduce the drag of the blades through the air when high boost wasn’t required. This reduction of drag allowed for increased fuel efficiency and economy while cruising, with the ability to switch to an aggressive air-moving profile when maximum power was needed. Then, further getting creative was adding an exhaust turbine to the system. No, this didn’t make a turbocharger — at least not in the way we think of turbochargers nowadays. The exhaust turbine instead drove the accessory drive to free up parasite loss from the crankshaft, while the compressor section was still directly driven by the crankshaft. While the principle proved to be sound, the implementation was unsuccessful as mechanical issues plagued the experimental power recovery systems. Very few actual images exist of the engine, with no known audio or visual recordings of the Crecy. Unfortunately, the only six test engines built have been lost to time. Too Little, Too Late Unfortunately, while all of these novel features of the Rolls Royce Crecy were quite impressive, it never really got a chance to prove itself. The engine was never flight tested and all of the massive horsepower numbers produced in testing were either calculations or extrapolations. After the engine’s highest recorded output in late 1944 of 1,798 horsepower, it was calculated that the exhaust turbine system would have resulted in a total output of 2,500 horsepower. Similarly, single-cylinder test numbers were then multiplied by 12 to claim a theoretical horsepower output of over 5,000 horsepower. With the end of the second world war and jet engine technology rapidly advancing, the Crecy engine was a victim of timing and circumstance. While its experimental technologies were, and still are, very interesting, it wasn’t enough to keep up with rapidly approaching jet age, and the Rolls Royce Crecy engines were destined to become nothing more than an interesting footnote in aviation history. Appleton airport announces major expansion The NFL draft and EAA AirVentures are expected to generate more air traffic APPLETON, Wis. (WBAY) - On the heels of the NFL choosing Green Bay as host of the 2025 NFL draft, officials revealed the construction of a new hangar at the Appleton Flight Center on Thursday, June 1, 2023. While the airport experienced growth in scheduled flights, the new facility will be used for private and charter planes - which will help with all the expected draft-related traffic. The planned expansion will benefit more than just the people traveling in and out of the private plane area, according to airport officials. They said it will also create jobs - as well as prepare for increased air traffic for EAA AirVenture and the 2025 NFL draft in Green Bay. Those events are estimated to make a combined economic impact of $370 million dollars. “Just a hangar. That’s what most people would say, it’s just a hangar. But what this means is that we are taking advantage of over $170 million of economic activity happening south of here in Oshkosh in July,” said Tom Nelson, Outagamie County Executive. “We have always been ahead of the curve, we have always viewed the work that we’ve done here, the mission that we seek to accomplish as economic development, as job creation, and not just for Outagamie County but for the entire region,” Tom Nelson added. The $7.2 million expansion project is funded by the 2022 Cares Act. “We’ve really invested in the customer experience, we’ve invested in the facilities, and it’s really starting to pay off with more people choosing to fly into Appleton Airport,” noted Abe Weber, Director, Appleton International Airport. Tom Nelson continued: “We have been building this reputation over the last ten years that when it comes to this type of aviation service, that they can count on the Appleton International Airport.” The airport reported a 10 percent increase in private planes landing in the first three months of 2023. “In the past five years, Maxair has seen huge growth. We started out with two turboprops, we are now at 15 aircraft,” commented Lisa Betley, Inside Sales Coordinator, Maxair Corporation. “This hangar is going to be a big part of our future growth as well as accommodating the growth that we’ve seen,” Abe Weber added. Things are already moving forward quickly - construction has begun, and the airport expects the project to be completed by fall of 2023. The B-2 Spirit is back in the air - the nuclear bomber takes to the skies for the first time since December 2022 Global Strike Command has officially resumed flights of the B-2 Spirit strategic bombers. The nuclear-capable aircraft has not been seen in the sky since late 2022. Here's What We Know The US Air Force has received 21 B-2 Spirit bombers from Northrop Grumman. One aircraft was destroyed a few years ago, reducing the fleet to 20 stealth aircraft. Thomas Bussiere, head of the Global Strike Command, earlier said experts had taken all necessary steps to safely return the B-2s to full flight. The nuclear bombers remained on the ground for more than five months. The first flight after the pause took place on 22 May 2203. In the first half of December 2022, flights were halted after the B-2 crashed at Whiteman, Missouri. After an emergency landing, the aircraft caught fire. The pilot was not injured and the fire was contained, but the cause was not specified. The B-2s are the only stealth aircraft in service with the US Air Force that can carry nuclear weapons. The B-52H Stratofortress does not possess stealth technology, and the fifth-generation F-35 Lightning II fighters are only being certified to carry nuclear weapons. The cost per B-2 Spirit bomber, taking into account inflation and the development program, is approximately $2.1 billion. In the future, the US Air Force will discard all B-2s and replace them with a hundred next-generation B-21 Raider aircraft (pictured above). Full-scale production is planned for 2026. Source: Flight Global Wrong fuel tank cap leads to accident The pilot reported that during the preflight inspection, he filled the Piper J-4A’s forward (main) fuel tank to about 1 inch below the top and noted that the auxiliary fuel tank contained 4 gallons of fuel. The pilot used a stick to “dip” the two fuel tanks and validate the amount of fuel in them. The pilot planned on departing from North Omaha Airport (3NO) in Nebraska for flight operations in the airport’s traffic pattern. Before the takeoff, the fuel selector was positioned for the forward fuel tank. During the takeoff, the airplane traveled about three-quarters of the way down the runway and climbed to about 300 feet above ground level. The engine sputtered once and stopped producing power. The pilot switched the fuel selector to the auxiliary fuel tank and tried to restart the engine unsuccessfully. He maneuvered the airplane for a forced landing, but the airplane hit the ground and came to rest next to a tree in a field. The pilot reported that fuel was pouring into the cockpit after the airplane came to rest, and he quickly got out of the airplane. The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings and the fuselage, while the pilot sustained minor injuries. A post-accident examination of the airframe and engine revealed that the fuel tank cap found installed on the filler neck of the forward fuel tank did not appear to be the correct part for the airplane. It had a part number of 2501621 etched on it with no manufacturer name displayed. The fuel tank cap appeared to be manufactured with a single vent hole. The fuel tank cap was equipped with two worn gaskets stacked under the cap. The lower gasket had multiple visible cracks present on both sides of it. The upper gasket was wrinkled and was displaced toward the vent hole, which blocked the venting capability of the fuel tank. Based on the available evidence, it could not be determined when the vent hole became blocked. No fuel was observed in the forward fuel tank, which had sustained impact damage. For the Piper J-4 Cub, the sole source of venting for the forward fuel tank is through a vented fuel tank cap. The approved part numbers for the forward fuel tank caps from the original equipment manufacturer (Piper) are A748 (the older style) or 00062-40 (the newer style). The pilot reported that the forward fuel tank cap was on the airplane when he purchased it several years ago. The pilot and his brother purchased the airplane together in March 2011, and the pilot became the sole owner in October 2017. The pilot did not have any knowledge of the origin or the background of the forward fuel tank cap. According to the airplane’s maintenance logbook, during the airplane’s most recent annual inspection, the airplane was inspected per Piper Inspection Sheets 230-3000. The accident occurred 39 days after the inspection, and 2.3 airplane flight hours had accumulated since the inspection. The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3B) discusses preflight procedures and states in part: Checking the fuel tank vent is an important part of a preflight assessment. If outside air is unable to enter the tank as fuel is drawn into the engine, the eventual result is fuel starvation and engine failure. During the preflight assessment, the pilot should look for signs of vent damage and blockage. Some airplanes utilize vented fuel caps, fuel vent tubes, or recessed areas under the wings where vents are located. The pilot should use a flashlight to look at the fuel vent to ensure that it is free from damage and clear of obstructions. If there is a rush of air when the fuel tank cap is cracked, there could be a serious problem with the vent system. Probable Cause: A total loss of engine power due to a blocked fuel tank cap vent hole, which resulted in fuel starvation. Contributing to the accident was the mechanic’s and the pilot’s inadequate inspections of the fuel tank cap. NTSB Identification: 103179 To download the final report. Click here. This will trigger a PDF download to your device. This May 2021 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others. FAA Activates Online Aircraft Registrations For Individual Owners The FAA has implemented the first phase of online aircraft registration and it will apply to the most common transactions for most GA owners and operators. “Individual aircraft owners can complete self-guided aircraft registration applications, upload legal and supplemental documents, receive auto-generated notifications, request aircraft registration N-numbers, use modernized online payment options, receive instant notification of payment, and digitally sign Aircraft Registration Applications,” the agency said in a notice on Sunday. The online registry for individual owners and operators appears to be a sort of beta test before more complex registrations are eventually accepted. “Online services will be continuously improved and expanded to include corporations, LLCs, partnerships, and non-citizen trusts,” the notice reads. Airbus Identifies Heat, Humidity As Causes Of A380 Wing-Spar Cracking FRANKFURT—A phenomenon called hydrogen assisted cracking or hydrogen embrittlement has been identified as the cause of accelerated crack development in certain wing spars of Airbus A380s that have been stored for extended periods of time. “The biggest driver is temperature; the second is moisture,” Pierre-Henri Brousse, head of the A380 program, told Aviation Week. When aircraft are on the ground and exposed to extreme weather conditions, hydrogen is diffused into the materials and causes embrittlement of the aluminum alloy, which in turn makes the generation of cracks easier. • Inspections to include “factored time on ground” • Storage recommendations will not change for A380 and other aircraft types • MRO capacity shortage makes repair work challenging • The findings are behind a May 11 airworthiness directive (AD) issued by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) that introduced the concept of “factored time on ground” (FTOG) and required inspections and potentially repairs at intervals also linked to actual aircraft age and a maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) threshold of 510 tons. The affected areas are the top and bottom flanges of the outer rear spar (ORS) between ribs 33 and 49. Previous ADs also included instructions for other parts in which defects had been found—the outer inner front spar (OIFS) between ribs 8 and 14 and the outer front spar between ribs 38 and 49. EASA and Airbus had determined as early as 2019 that aircraft have to be inspected 15 years after the date of the wingbox assembly. Following the findings, the maintenance limit was pulled forward twice. EASA published an AD on Aug. 31, 2022, expanding on a 2019 directive. In the AD, EASA said: “Occurrences have been reported of finding cracks in the affected areas of the wing ORS on in-service A380 aeroplanes. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could reduce the structural integrity of the wing.” The 2019 AD, based on Airbus’ service bulletin A380-57-8263, had initially set the 15-year limit. However, “since that AD was issued, it has been determined that additional areas may be affected by the same unsafe condition, and that all MSN (manufacturer serial numbers) must be inspected.” EASA added in December 2022 that “recent inspection results have indicated the need for ORS inspection from 15 years to 12.5 years.” That was later revised to 11.5 years—with the initial date of wing box assembly as the reference point. But that remained insufficient. “We inspected some aircraft that were younger than the threshold described by the regulator,” Brousse said. “And we had some findings.” Airbus then launched a deep dive into the data to try to understand why aircraft as young as 10 years (after wing box assembly and therefore with sometimes significantly fewer years in revenue service) were developing the cracks. “We accumulated a sample that became statistically relevant,” Brousse said. Eventually, the research yielded results—namely that storage conditions have an effect on how fast the cracking develops. Importantly, the findings will not “substantially change” Airbus’ recommendations for storage of the A380 or any other type. The aluminum alloy of the affected spars is no longer used in any other Airbus aircraft and is changed to a different material when parts are replaced during repairs. “We have no concerns for other components,” Brousse said. Airbus has not disclosed which airlines are most affected by the defects. However, Emirates said in November 2022 that it is dealing with the issue. The airline had parked many of its A380s at the Dubai World Central airport during the coronavirus pandemic, where they were exposed to particularly high temperatures and humidity during summer. Qatar Airways and Etihad are two more Gulf carriers with A380 fleets, though Etihad is only now beginning to return its A380s to service. According to Aviation Week Network’s Fleet Discovery database, 135 A380s are in active service, with Emirates operating 87 of them. Singapore Airlines and British Airways are flying 11 of the aircraft each. Qatar Airways and Qantas are following with seven and six, respectively. Most current A380 operators are in the process of returning more of the aircraft from storage, given how fast demand has rebounded on long-haul routes. Emirates has two more aircraft in parked/reserve status, six are parked and 26 are stored. According to Airbus, wing inspections take about one week. The non-destructive test inspections can typically be performed by airlines in-house. Affected parts can be repaired through local stopholes or reinforcements, or will be replaced. Stopholes can be introduced in one shift, while the more extensive repairs can take one week per area affected. Finding enough MRO capacity to deal with the repairs is an ongoing issue, Brousse said. However, he described the situation as manageable and now that A380s are being taken out of service because of the cracking, Airbus is trying to find more MRO providers globally that have the needed A380 capability and free capacity. The manufacturer is also helping with repairs of some aircraft that are performed in Airbus hangars in Toulouse. Emirates has returned younger aircraft first to avoid running into inspection intervals early. An Emirates spokesperson said the airline is reviewing the inspection requirements outlined in the May 11 EASA AD. “Currently, we see minimal disruption to our scheduled A380 operations,” the spokesperson told Aviation Week. “We are working on the mid-longer term MRO support requirements for our A380 fleet. We expect a large part of the work will be conducted at Emirates’ Engineering Center, and we are also looking at supplementary support from Airbus and our MRO partners.” Curt Lewis