Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: lenochs%drcoa1.decnet@drcvax.af.mil (DRCOA1::LENOCHS) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Aircraft Maintenance Message-ID: <1991Feb21.030659.12033@cbnews.att.com> Date: 21 Feb 91 03:06:59 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 72 Approved: military@att.att.com From: "DRCOA1::LENOCHS" Several postings have been seen recently discussing aircraft maintenance policies and procedures. I thought I'd throw my two cents in. I have been working in the computerized record keeping of aircraft maintenance for the AF both in an out of the service for about 10 years now. Some of the standard things recorded for a single flight are: - start and stop times - type mission - number of landing gear cycles - rounds fired - discrepancies noted by the pilot/GIB (guy in back) - engine statistics (some are high temp of flight, flameouts, high RPM of flight - number of landings (touch and go counts one each time - tracked for tire and landing gear wear) - number of full-stop landings (brake pads, drogue parachute wear) - for a prototype system built for AH-64As, we also tracked the number of hours the crew wore night vision devices and the job description of the crew members (IP, etc), because we also would print the flight crew records. Other things tracked are: - maintenance action start and stop times - how malfunctioned codes - when discovered codes - action taken - crew size - serially controlled parts removed/installed - bits and pieces removed/installed - cannibalization - phased maintenance accomplishment (overhaul) - support general actions (washing, pre-flight, post-flight, thru-flight inspections, fueling, etc) - time change requirements (replace the engine oil after 50 hours, or replace gun barrel after 10000 rounds fired, as examples) - inspection requirements - emergency actions (ground the fleet, inspect wings for cracks). Some of the systems I've worked with (I worked with six different systems) are more sophisticated than others; some will schedule the next inspection when you report you've completed the current one, for example. Some systems perform the same maintenance tracking for the ground support equipment used on the aircraft (tracking maintenance on avionics test stations). But the goal of all of these systems is trend and failure analysis. These systems use the collected data to determine if particular items are performing as expected. One system was used by General Dynamics to fix an F-16 problem. The manager at GD looked at a months worth of 'RTOK' results (re-test OK), and determined that the socket the black box is plugged into on the test station and the socket on the aircraft had different failure thresholds (the test station was designed to take more abuse, since boxes are plugged in and out all day long). Currently, only the F-117As and the F-16s from Torrejon AB in Spain have online data reporting and analysis in the Gulf (that I know of). All the other aircraft depend on mailing the paper forms back to their units for data entry. Well, now that I've bored everybody........... Loyd M. Enochs (ex-USAF) Dynamics Research Corp Andover, MA 01810