Tag: Featured Story

Now more than ever, airlines and maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) organizations are seeking ways to improve their engine maintenance programs in a bid to reduce costs and improve turnaround time. One way these companies are doing this is by applying advanced information technology (IT) systems to engine monitoring, maintenance, and troubleshooting. “There is an increasing focus to move more towards data-driven decision making as opposed to a hardware-driven process, which has traditionally been the dominating paradigm,” said Markus Wagner, head of digital maintenance services at MTU Maintenance.

Qualities of an Effective IT System

IT systems improve aircraft engine maintenance by analyzing the data being collected by engine sensors during flight. They then analyze this data to assess engine performance, alerting human technicians to any immediate issues and signs of potential problems.

To be truly useful, an engine maintenance IT system must possess certain qualities. One of these is the ability to analyze engine-related data with minimal human supervision, through a process that Prakash Babu Devara, head of marketing (aviation) for Ramco Systems (maker of the Ramco MRO Aviation Solution platform) refers to as “smart automation”.

“Engine maintenance processes generate a wealth of data pertaining to the defects, parts consumed, labor hours, and elapsed time to carry out repair and overhaul procedures,” explained Devara. “Accumulated over time, this data can become a goldmine of information to gain insights. Our solution derives insights into all key processes by analyzing this data, and provides Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) related to Turnaround Time (TAT), quality, cost, resource utilization, and warranties dynamically without any need for manual consolidation and preparation.”

Worth noting: All of these capabilities must be made available to mobile devices on the shop floor. Doing so allows aviation mechanics to book appointments, report their findings, request parts and tools, and access technical documents everywhere — along with collaborating with other technicians through chat, videocall, and screen share from the same device.

Lufthansa Technik is a strong believer in using IT systems to enhance its engine maintenance operations. But just extending these systems throughout the entire operation isn’t enough. To ensure that they deliver their promised benefits, “seamless and consistent user experiences across IT solutions are key,” said Matthias Beck, head of digital products/data & analytics engine service for Lufthansa Technik. In other words, these systems must be designed to be intuitive and easy to use, as well as far-reaching and being deployed enterprise-wide.

The payoff from these efforts are better results for all. “By digitalizing the entire process in our MRO Management platform, we simplify and streamline the vast amount of information and communication flowing back and forth between us as the MRO and the aircraft operator,” Beck said. “The accessibility independent of location and time, as well as the visualization of all details in a dashboard in a structured and standardized form, enables our customers to have a real-time overview of the status and shows where immediate action is required if necessary.”

Beck’s last point is endorsed by Devara, who emphasized that everyone in the engine maintenance supply chain needs access to this information to achieve maximum benefits. “The seamless flow of data between the ecosystem partners such as suppliers, contractors, shipping partners, banks is essential for augmenting operational efficiency,” he said.

Another necessary feature of an effective engine maintenance IT system is reliable, wide-ranging access to digital documentation. This requires the engine maintenance organization using the system to be paperless, “and also not to be reliant on PDFs and other non-machine-readable formats,” said Henrik Ollus, vice president of aviation data exchange business at QOCO Systems (maker of the cloud-based engine maintenance IT system Aviadex.io). “Only once the data is reliably available in a machine-readable format is real automation possible.”

Ollus added that rigorous data accuracy is a must for these IT systems, given how much is riding on aircraft engine maintenance. “Ninety-five percent data accuracy is not enough in the highly regulated aviation industry,” he said. “Proper data quality controls are needed. This again highlights the importance of machine-readable data formats, as automated data quality checks and cross-system reconciliation can then be applied.”

End-to-end coverage of all work functions is a further necessity for engine maintenance IT systems, since gaps can lead to errors. This is why “the IT systems in the GE MRO network cover all aspects of engine overhaul activities,” said Alf Cherry, CIO, Commercial Engine Services at GE Aerospace. As well, “consistency across the GE Aerospace MRO network drives quality data capture,” he noted. “This ensures efficient coordination, quick information exchange, and accurate customer updates, resulting in faster service delivery.”

Unfortunately, this level of connectivity can run counter to the traditional ways that many engine maintenance shops are structured. “In these organizations, the data points between Engineering, Supply Chain, Hangar/Shop Floor, and Finance sit in silos, for reasons that were chosen with a department’s interest in mind as opposed to a cross-organizational need,” said Sriram P. Haran, founder and CEO of KeepFlying Pte Ltd., which uses artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze risks in the aviation industry.

The same shortfalls apply to some vendor-provided software as well. “For instance, OEM-driven tools from GE, Pratt & Whitney, and Rolls Royce provide coverage as part of managing shop visits, exchanging trend and sensor data broadly within the spectrum of predictive maintenance,” Haran said. “However, this doesn’t encompass fundamental airworthiness data points inherent to each engine.”

The Power of AI

AI is at the heart of today’s engine maintenance IT systems. With its ability to process massive amounts of sensor data and apply them to digital versions of physical engines — a process known by the name of “digital twins” — AI makes it possible to track, record, and model every change occurring in an actual engine from the day it was designed to its service history. In this way, AI provides engine maintenance shops with an unparalleled ability to manage and diagnose every single one of their clients’ engines in detail. It also provides sufficient processing power to detect signs of problems as they occur, and even before!

“These days, digital twins and artificial intelligence are playing a significant role in fleet management and MRO efficiency,” said Dinakar Deshmukh, vice president of data and analytics, GE Aerospace. “For instance, GE Aerospace has been using contemporary digital technologies to build the digital twins of every flying GE commercial engine, which are used to monitor and take appropriate action enabling optimized operations for both customers and the business. GE employs a unique approach of fusing deep domain understanding coupled with machine learning (aka ML, a subset within artificial intelligence) to build these differentiated twin models. This resulted in significant improvement in fleet management — namely a reduction in false positives, increased lead time and asset utilization.”

Deshmukh’s positive assessment of AI and the digital twins it enables is shared by every company who spoke to Aviation Maintenance for this story. The enthusiasm of their assessments is worth quoting, in order to drive home how strongly they support this IT system approach.

A case in point: at Lufthansa Technik, the employment of AI and digital twins “opens new possibilities for engine maintenance,” Beck said. “Through condition monitoring and the continuous assessment of engine parameters, such as temperature, pressure, vibration, and fluid levels, any abnormalities or early signs of malfunction can be identified. Advanced sensors and monitoring systems can collect real-time data and provide valuable insights into the engine’s overall health. By tracking these parameters, potential issues can be detected early, allowing for timely interventions and reducing the likelihood of failures.”

In plain language, “by leveraging machine learning and advanced analytics, AI can identify patterns and correlations that human operators might miss,” said Devara. “This enables proactive maintenance strategies, reducing downtime and increasing operational efficiency.”

AI can also reduce the occurrences of AOG (Aircraft on Ground), while also cutting scheduled maintenance costs and making preventive maintenance possible.

For example, “Lufthansa Technik has developed proprietary, physical-based (thermodynamics) models to apply AI and ML algorithms to predict aging, crack propagations, fouling and wear of compressor and turbine parts, amongst others,” Beck said. These predictions allow this MRO to take a more preventative approach to engine maintenance, including deleting scheduled service when the facts show it to be unnecessary.

“Rather than following a fixed maintenance schedule, operators and MROs can schedule maintenance activities when the engine’s condition indicates a need for intervention,” said Beck. “This proactive approach minimizes unexpected breakdowns, extends the engine’s lifespan, and optimizes operational efficiency and time-on-wing compared to traditional approaches.”

Then there’s the financial implications of AI, which are considerable in themselves. “Digital twins have been very useful to the aviation business,” said KeepFlying’s Haran. But their usefulness goes beyond keeping engines in service: “While we are still exploring extended uses of this technology, the moment has come to understand how commercial implications of decisions against your engines, for instance, can be represented as a digital twin,” he explained. “Thus, the FinTwin was born — a financial twin that allows you to visualize the commercial impact of a decision against an asset using its underlying airworthiness and maintenance data with AI-driven data models.”

In the same vein, “standardizing data exchanges between the ecosystem of lessors, OEMs, airlines, MROs, CAMO facilities and supply chain vendors — especially with the crisis around supply chain TAT today — is critical to ensure that the airline industry can make profit margins greater than the industry’s 1.8% predicted by IATA by the end of this year,” Haran added.

The Limits of IT Systems

So far this article has waxed poetic about the many benefits of engine maintenance IT systems, especially those enabled by AI/ML. But it is worth noting that, as good as they are, these IT systems have their limits. These limits need to be kept in mind when relying on these systems, because even the best of AI-enabled IT systems are not meant to run without human supervision.

One of the most basic limits is the quality of information being fed into an IT system. If this information is of poor quality, the same will be true for the data that the system outputs, even if it is assisted by AI.

Take digital twins, for instance. “The key for their usefulness is based on the granularity, quality, and timeliness of the data that built up that digital twin,” Ollus said. In other words, the quality (or lack thereof) of any digital twin is governed by the “garbage in/garbage out effect,” he observed. (Also known as GIGO, this is a longtime computer programming term, meant to caution programmers and clients of expecting too much from too little.) “AI-powered tools are at their best when based on large amounts of data.”

A lack of machine-readable data on specific engines — particularly older models — can also hamper an AI-enabled IT system’s ability to do its job properly. “Non-availability of key technical data for specific engines and its life-limited parts (LLP) is one of the challenges that Ramco is seeing in the market,” said Devara. “The fact that this technical data still resides in silos and paper formats is undermining the value of digital technology to engine maintenance. Accessing this data and utilizing it effectively remains a key area of focus in the industry.”

Finally, “the biggest challenge probably lies in the harmonization of newly-developed digital tools like AI-assisted MRO planning with legacy systems that have been around in the industry for decades,” Wagner said. “It is very much an ongoing discussion.”

All of these limits are not standing in the way of IT systems adoption by engine maintenance organizations. In fact, “nothing is changing the MRO industry and is driving the development of new solutions more than digitalization,” Beck said. “It is the only game changer of this decade. With 50 times more data generated by new aircraft types and approximately 50% of airline operating costs consisting directly or indirectly of MRO services, further cost reductions can only be accomplished through MRO and operational optimization driven by digitalization.”

What’s Coming Next?

As powered as today’s AI-enabled engine management IT systems, they will be able to do even more in the future as processing power increases and processing algorithms improve.

So what’s coming next? “I predict an extension in data exchange, as opposed to point-to-point integrations and manual data sharing,” said Ollus. “Data sharing platforms will ensure access to data from many/most airlines through the same platform, rather than just relying on one airline’s content.”

“Profitability margin improvement requires airlines to take a closer look at their data management/data exchange ecosystem,” Haran agreed. As well, “the time is ripe to latch on to the wave to explore avenues that can make it easier to transition towards a paperless ecosystem — not only within the hangar or shop floor but across departments to stick to net zero carbon goals.”

GE Aerospace is looking forward to AI-assisted automatic inspections where possible, with these IT systems “automatically feeding this inspection information to drive continuous improvement of predictive digital twins,” said Deshmukh. “Some of the low hanging improvements we can think of are processing customer workscoping data from PDF-based documents, leveraging the historical data and machine learning for estimating the scrap rates and workscopes,” Devara added. “We can also optimize the usage of specific serial numbers of parts for meeting the customer demands and reducing the cost.”

All told, the “digitization of TechOps will further gain importance in airlines’ value chain steering and optimization,” said Beck. In this digitalized world, “data access and ownership will be key for airlines to maintain independence.”

“We are always looking for ways to improve the IT-based services of the entire MRO process for two reasons,” Wagner said. “One is to increase the efficiency of our MRO processes and two is for business enablement purposes. If we can continue to develop newer and better ways of conducting maintenance work, we can offer the market exactly what it demands.”

Summing up, the integration of information technology into engine maintenance programs is significantly enhancing the accuracy and speed at which these services are being provided by airlines and MROs. Advanced analytics capabilities enable real-time monitoring and proactive detection of potential issues, while predictive modeling algorithms optimize maintenance schedules. Additionally, the seamless communication facilitated by IT systems ensures that all stakeholders have access to timely and relevant information. As this technology continues to advance, we can expect further improvements in AI-enabled engine maintenance IT systems and their processes, ultimately leading to safer and more efficient air travel.

Testing for unexpected avionics problems helps planes safely operate as scheduled.

Avionics systems play a critical role in aircraft safety and performance. Avionic systems manufacturers and designers must be confident in the reliability, endurance and safety of aircraft and engine components’ subsystems and full systems. Avionics test equipment used during the manufacturing and maintenance of aircraft avionics systems helps planes operate as scheduled and at peak efficiency. Also, this equipment assists engineers and aircraft companies ensure full compliance with heavily controlled federal regulations, specifications and standards. Aircraft structures must go through many levels of testing before receiving airworthiness certification by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or Department of Defense (DoD).

Essential Equipment

Some consider avionics repair and testing equipment to be the most essential equipment used in the production, troubleshooting, repair and maintenance of aircraft and their avionics systems and instruments. Primarily used for calibration, inspection, evaluation and testing of various aircraft devices, avionic testing systems aim to inspect and resolve electrical and mechanical issues, conduct performance checks, and repair the brakes and other components of the aircraft.

The quantity and diversity of equipment and systems requiring testing in avionic systems equates to an equally complex range of test equipment. Avionics test equipment can be divided into two categories: general test equipment and specific test equipment. General test equipment can be used to perform tests on avionics systems in general, such as diagnostics, fault detection, and performance measurements. Specific test equipment is more specific and is used to test specific components or systems of a particular type of aircraft.

Actual test system equipment covers items from signal generators and digital voltmeters to autopilot servo test stands for clutch torque evaluation. Vacuum and pressure instrument chambers, manual turn and tilt tables, single axis rate tables and tachometer testers are some other common aviation test equipment. Bench-type equipment is primarily used for repair and alignment of avionics equipment and normally is larger in size than the smaller portable equipment used to service the aircraft on the ramp for troubleshooting.

Standard tensile, compression, shear and fatigue coupon tests, using the material properties quantified in these tests, help determine component material composition, dimensions, and joining methods. Designs must then be verified by testing individual components, systems, and entire airframe structures. Component and airframe tests allow for interactions between parts of an aircraft, providing the most realistic test scenario possible without actually flying the aircraft. Like coupon tests, full-scale airframe tests are conducted in static and fatigue loadings and can be conducted on undamaged or damaged airframes.

Common Types

While there are hundreds of different aviation test equipment apparatus, here are two of the most common.

Over the past two decades performance flight testing of full-scale aircraft has transferred some of the testing workload to simulation-based systems. In addition to simulating flight conditions with their 3-D capabilities, simulators can create a realistic environment for aircraft system testing. They can find errors in aircraft functions, systems, and components in real time.

A computer simulation-based environment is not only less expensive than flight testing full-scale aircraft in a real-world environment but all the aircraft’s systems can be modelled in the simulation. In addition to mathematical modelling, other technologies behind simulation testing include real-time computation, motion actuation, visual image-generation systems and projection systems. All the aircraft’s systems, such as avionics and sensors, can be directly built into the simulation just as they would be on the actual aircraft. Simulation tests allow the use of extra measurement equipment that might be too large or otherwise impractical to include on board a real aircraft. Throughout different phases of the design process, different engineering simulators with various levels of complexity are typically used.

Benchtop test systems also provide a realistic environment for testing aircraft systems. Compared to simulators they are more compact, more portable, lighter in weight, less power-hungry, and require fewer maintenance personnel. They are also less expensive than simulators and can be used to test a wider range of aircraft systems. Many benchtop test systems are configurable and scalable. They can solve typical functional test coverage challenges throughout an aerospace product’s life cycle — and many are upgradable as test requirements evolve.

A testament to the versatility of benchtop aviation test equipment, Severn Beach, Solihull, United Kingdom-based GKN Aerospace has patents approved covering a new benchtop ice adhesion test device which incorporates apparatus to simulate icing conditions and then determine ice adhesion in situ. This will enable swifter, less costly assessment of promising ice phobic coatings and other ice protection technologies. Efficient ice protection systems lower power consumption, improving aircraft efficiency and lowering emissions.

Nondestructive Testing

Two of the most important methods for aircraft testing include the nondestructive procedures eddy current testing (ECT) and ultrasonic testing (UT). Compared to other NDT methods, ECT and UT can detect more flaws in less time and without the hassle of extensive setup times. With ECT, NDT analysts can cover surface defects and near-surface defects with greater efficiency and speed. UT also probes the same anomalies on a volumetric level and with the same expediency.

There are tools and equipment available that enhance ECT and UT functionality. This includes instrumentation with specialized capabilities that foster flexible scans and additional customization schemes. These are instruments capable of phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) and eddy current array (ECA), the most effective NDT methods of all the currently available options for commercial aircraft inspections.

Conventional ultrasound is more advanced than most NDT techniques and phased array ultrasound is better still. Traditional UT has inflexible scanning positions and limited customization options, preventing analysts from finding flaws in awkward angles. With PAUT however, inspectors can customize the beam shapes, adjusting the focus depths and achieve several angles. PAUT addresses the inconsistent thickness patterns of aircraft components. It’s also malleable enough to conform to the shape and texture of any component being tested.

Eddy current array enhances conventional eddy current testing through the multi-coil features in a single probe. The additional coils allow NDT inspectors to scan a wider radius while detecting more defects in less time. ECA has a very good best signal-to-noise rate (SNR), which boosts the probability of detection (POD). ECA probes can also spot hard-to-find anomalies in the form of pitting, surface cracks and corrosion.

Other Testing

Other aerospace tests include:

• Dynamic testing. Vibration, shock and acoustic noise dynamic testing equipment are in this group. Most vibration tables and shakers are capable of delivering up to 70,000 force/pounds, acceleration forces up to 750g and pyro-shock capabilities.

• Stress analysis and failure assessment. Materials fracture mechanics, fatigue, finite element analysis, inspection and welding tests are in this group to provide failure analyses.

• Cloud testing. This is a centralized testing system where testing data can be uploaded for all interested parties to view and interpret in real-time. Engineers can obtain information from testing data from other similar aircraft. They can then use this data to correlate with their own inspection.

• Environmental simulation. Environmental simulation chambers can test everything from individual devices to complete systems. Combined environment testing including temperature, humidity, altitude and vibration, explosive atmospheres, sand and salt fog and more are in this group.

• Fuel testing. Overall efficiency and performance of all-important fuel tank and fuel system components can be tested in this group. Fuel icing and contamination of fuel testing, helium leak tests, flow analysis, functional/qualification testing are available.

Testing Standards

Many standard test methods have been created for testing certain aviation materials. These test methods are published and updated by standards organizations such as ASTM, ISO, CEN, NASM, and DIN. Some of the more common include:

• ISO 6892-1 & 2 Metal Tensile Testing
• ISO 527 – Tensile Test of Plastics Composites
• ASTM C1273 Tensile Ceramic Test Equipment
• ASTM C1424 Compression Ceramics Test Machine
• ASTM D638 Tensile Testing for Plastics
• ASTM D695 Compression Testing for Rigid Plastics
• ASTM D4762 Polymer Matrix Fiber Reinforced Composites Test Equipment
• ASTM E9 Compression Testing of Metallic Materials at Room Temperature
• ASTM E8 Tension Testing of Metallic Materials

Avionic testing equipment can involve testing and simulation using standards such as MIL-STD-1553 and ARINC-429 and embedded systems such as multi-protocol modules and interfaces.

RTCA DO-160

RTCA DO-160 (Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment) covers standard procedures and environmental test criteria for testing airborne electronic equipment and mechanical systems with numerous regulatory requirements. It ensures airborne equipment meet the airworthiness requirements for fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft. The most current revision, RTCA DO-160G, specifies tests that are typically performed to meet the requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other regulatory bodies for equipment installed on aircraft. It has become a common testing standard recognized throughout the aerospace industry.

RTCA DO-160 is used by all major aircraft manufacturers to ensure that electronic systems and components are safe and reliable in any environmental condition. It is applicable for any aircraft, from business jets and helicopters to full-scale airliners. It includes 23 sections of test methods covering all aspects of the aircraft environment from temperature, altitude, shock, and vibration to RF emissions, lightning effects, and flammability.

It’s no secret that the aviation industry is experiencing significant shifts and growing pains. Demand for pilots, mechanics and maintenance technicians are at all-time highs while the industry continues to face workforce shortages and personnel retirements. Despite these challenges, the industry isn’t slowing down anytime soon, which is why those who are working to build aerospace clusters, address workforce challenges, foster collaborations and incentivize new projects are so crucial to the health of the industry and the advancement of their local communities. It is with such demand in mind that we are thrilled to move forward with the development of the Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park — a groundbreaking expansion spanning nearly 130 acres across the John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County Airport (JST).

A collaboration of partners with the shared goal of building up western Pennsylvania’s aviation industry and assets is leading to transformative change and innovation in warp-speed time. Centered around a planned aviation maintenance and service hub, the Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park is an example of leaders coming together to meet industry needs head-on. By advancing aviation training programs, offering unmatched incentives and creating an ecosystem for success, we are establishing an ideal scenario for aerospace companies seeking growth while fostering progress for both the region and industry.

At the core of the Opportunity Park will be a state-of-the-art, 100,000-square-foot Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) facility with direct access to a 7,000-foot runway. This facility will significantly enhance the airport’s capabilities, serving as a regional hub for routine repairs, servicing and inspections of aircraft, including narrow body airline, military and corporate aircraft. We are actively pursuing an MRO operator to anchor this facility which will be supported by avionics parts suppliers, as well as distribution and training facilities.

When the Opportunity Park opens in 2024, this venture will not only create hundreds of high-wage jobs, but also stimulate the growth of the aviation/aerospace industry in western Pennsylvania to effectively meet escalating demand. To ensure success, we are working on aviation curriculum that will be infused into regional high schools; have secured a Keystone Opportunity Zone (KOZ) designation committed to offering competitive business incentives; are developing a commercially viable, first-of-its-kind UAS ecosystem, and much more. All of these pieces meshed together mean one thing: this region is the place to be for MROs and new aviation businesses that want to expand, meet their needs and have the long-term systems and support in place to do just that.

Strengthening the Workforce Pipeline

One of Pennsylvania’s greatest strengths lies in its highly skilled and diverse workforce. From top-ranked state colleges and universities to aviation and technical schools, the Laurel Highlands region of western Pennsylvania is surrounded by top-notch talent — with new industry-focused programs and partnerships being established all the time.

Our aviation ecosystem is only as strong as the workforce that supports it, which is why I’m excited about the new initiatives in our region that are gaining momentum and drawing attention from the industry.

In 2022, Saint Francis University (SFU) expanded its existing relationship with Nulton Aviation Flight Academy to provide students access to SkyWest Airline’s Elite Pilot Pathway and Aviation Maintenance Training Pathway programs. SFU received a $1 million grant from the Appalachian Regional Commission to establish an Aviation Maintenance Technician School, and SkyWest even donated a decommissioned CRJ200 aircraft to SFU last year, offering aspiring aviation mechanics real-world, hands-on experience.

We’re also excited to be taking our aviation training and workforce development into high school classrooms. Work is well underway to integrate aviation curriculum into regional public high schools starting as early as this fall.

Furthermore, it’s well known that some of the nation’s leading aviation education and training establishments are located here, including the Aviation Institute of Maintenance, Pittsburgh Institute of Aeronautics, and Pennsylvania College of Technology. In addition to these world-class institutions, the area boasts over 212,140 students enrolled in higher education, with Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Saint Francis University, the University of Pittsburgh and Penn State University serving as educational pillars.

Our workforce pipeline is strong and growing. Our partners are dedicated to nurturing the workforce that’s needed now and well into the future, and we are ensuring that western Pennsylvania is one of the most attractive destinations in the country for the aviation industry for generations to come.

Fostering the Ecosystem With Support From Forward-Looking Leaders

As an entrepreneur, I’ve had the privilege of working in other states and have partnered with many business leaders who have worked in other parts of the country, as well, and I can tell you with certainty that the business, academia and government leaders here in the Keystone State are unlike any other. Their can-do attitude, collaborative spirit and positive pro-business mindset are unprecedented and directly contribute to economic development success.

One such partnership is Aerium, a new nonprofit launched in 2022 by numerous partners, dedicated to creating education and career opportunities in the aviation industry. Like the Opportunity Park, Aerium has garnered substantial state and local support, receiving over $13 million in funding over just a few years. As the chair of Aerium, I can confidently say that we envision it playing a critical role in the development and expansion of our region’s aviation industry and workforce, including that of the Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park, for decades to come.

In addition to the partnerships between Aerium, SFU, Nulton Aviation, SkyWest and others, our initiatives have garnered immense support from the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, the airport authority, federal, state and local leaders, and many more. This collective effort has enabled the Opportunity Park to secure a Keystone Opportunity Zone designation — one of the nation’s boldest and most generous economic development programs — that offers tax abatements, exemptions, reductions and credits to businesses that choose to establish themselves within the zone. Moreover, most business purchases within the zone will be exempt from state and local sales tax for property used in operations.

We also look forward to the strong potential of the region to be a leader in the UAS sector. With the Pennsylvania Drone Association as a key partner, we are working to incorporate a commercially viable UAS ecosystem within the Opportunity Park — with the vision to offer rapid-response drone medical deliveries, beyond visual line of sight operations (BVLOS), provide collaborative opportunities with our defense sector partners and support local UAS business operations — making this region a first-of-its-kind in the space.

None of these achievements would be possible without the engagement of our key partners. Federal, state and local leaders have joined forces to make our region one of the most attractive destinations in the country for the aviation industry. Pennsylvania State Senator Wayne Langerholc (chair of Transportation), U.S. Congressman John Joyce, U.S. Congressman Glenn “GT” Thompson, Pennsylvania State Representatives Jim Rigby and Frank Burns, members from the Cambria County Board of Commissioners, and others have all actively worked to bring the Opportunity Park to life by supporting our many industry initiatives.

I think Senator Langerholc summed up the state’s support best when he said that this park has the opportunity to be a “real game changer” and that “we have advocated across many levels — local, state and federal — to get the necessary dollars here and help fund this great project.”

As a passionate advocate for the aviation community in western Pennsylvania, I’m thrilled to witness the remarkable progress made by these strong public-private partnerships to expand and advance the aviation ecosystem in the region and directly meet industry needs. From breaking ground on the Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park to strengthening our workforce pipeline and paving the way for industry growth, numerous partners are working hand-in-hand to transform and evolve the industry.

Strategic Location

Anticipated to open in 2024, the Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park offers build-to-suit leases in an ideal location for companies seeking access to a highly mobile population and a region with a growing industrial base. Situated in the heart of the northeastern United States, it provides direct access to prominent metropolitan clusters such as New York, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Philadelphia, Boston and Washington, D.C. This advantageous proximity allows companies to tap into large customer bases, establish robust supply chains, and facilitate seamless transportation of goods and personnel.

Pennsylvania’s rich aviation heritage, demonstrated by its commitment to aerospace innovation and industry, further enhances its appeal. The region is home to renowned institutions like NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility, while industry giants such as Lockheed Martin and Martin-Baker have chosen it as one of their bases of operations. This legacy fosters a culture of excellence, attracts top talent, and creates a collaborative ecosystem for the growth and development of new aviation technologies.

The surrounding Cambria County communities also offer an outstanding and affordable quality of life, with the added advantage of being a short drive from the metropolitan assets of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. Nestled in the scenic Laurel Highlands of western Pennsylvania, the region boasts a vibrant history in the steel industry and a wide range of historical, cultural and recreational offerings. The area’s economy has also experienced significant expansion in health care, technology and finance, providing ample opportunities for both residents and businesses to grow.

With its close proximity to John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County Airport, the Opportunity Park benefits from the support and services of Cambrian Hills Development Group-affiliated fixed base operator Nulton Aviation Services, while the airport itself is equipped with a direct-access, concrete-reinforced, 7,000-foot-long, 150-foot-wide runway.

By continuing to develop and support the Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park, and by encouraging new business to locate to the Keystone State, we can harness Pennsylvania’s great potential to create job opportunities, attract industry players and drive economic growth. Through our collective efforts and the establishment of a robust aviation/aerospace ecosystem, western Pennsylvania is on track to emerge as a greater hub for the aviation and aerospace industries.

For more information about the Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park, visit theopportunitypark.com.

About Dr. Larry Nulton:

An aviation entrepreneur and member of the Pennsylvania Transportation Advisory Committee, Dr. Larry Nulton graduated from Penn State University before earning his Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from Bowling Green State University. Today, Dr. Nulton is the co-owner of Nulton Aviation Services, chair of his new nonprofit, Aerium, and CEO of Cambrian Hills Development Group, the organization responsible for the development of the new Mid-Atlantic Opportunity Park.

Covid-19 Impact on Aircraft Utilization

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared Covid-19 a pandemic. By April 6, 2020, the United Nations World Tourism Organization reported that 96% of all worldwide destinations were subject to some form of travel restriction. Using AviationValues data we examine the impact Covid-19 had on the commercial passenger industry.

The severity of the impact on the commercial aviation industry, due to the unprecedented drop in passenger demand, is illustrated by the chart below. AviationValues tracks the positions of the global passenger fleet daily using each aircraft’s ADS-B signal. This enables a picture of each aircraft’s activity to be built, showing when it is in active service versus temporarily parked or in longer term storage.

In the years leading up to 2020, the percentage of the fleet in active service was relatively stable at around the 90% level for widebodies, slightly higher for narrowbodies. By April 2020 the imposition of travel restrictions, particularly into and out of major travel markets, forced a large proportion of the fleet to become inactive.

Understandably, the closing of borders, and the resultant impact on international regional and long-haul travel demand, has had the most lasting effect on widebodies, which today have a fleet utilisation of 77%, lagging behind narrowbody fleet utilisation at 84%. Restrictions on the all-important transatlantic and transpacific markets were only fully relaxed in May 2023 with the removal of the United States’ Covid-19 vaccine requirement for all non-US travelers. Travel to the United States had been restricted in some shape or form from January 2020 when non-US travelers from China were first barred entry. China itself closed its borders under a ”zero tolerance” Covid-19 policy in March 2020, and was the last major air travel market to reopen, only doing so in January 2023.

Because relaxation of travel restriction policies were not always coordinated, the recovery on international routes, predominantly served by widebodies, was much slower than recovery in domestic markets. By looking at snapshots of the fleet on the same day (June 29) between 2019 and 2023, we can see the impact of travel restrictions on representative aircraft types in the figure below.

Narrowbodies, represented by the Airbus A320neo and Boeing 737-800, exhibited the highest resilience in terms of utilization, followed by widebody twins such as the Airbus A350-900 and Boeing 777-300ER. The Airbus A380, like the competing Boeing 747 quadjet, suffered the most significant drops in activity.

Covid-19 Impact on Values

At the start of the pandemic, there were expectations from opportunists that the drop in passenger demand would spark a wave of airline restructurings that would result in a flood of aircraft available for outright sale. There were certainly a number of restructurings that occurred, but lessors and financiers largely acted to avoid large numbers of repossessions, opting to renegotiate financing and lease terms and keep the aircraft with the operator who would contract to keep the aircraft looked after while in storage, itself a very costly exercise.

In addition, a number of the more creditworthy airlines moved to sell and then lease back their aircraft to lessors, who, with cheap capital in plentiful supply, were able to increase their share of the commercial passenger fleet. As a result, there were relatively few (particularly considering the severity of the downturn) open market distressed trades occurring during the pandemic.

Nevertheless, it was clear that the market had moved, and that an aircraft on the open market would simply not command the same price in 2020 that it would have done a year prior.

Using utilization as a proxy, together with transaction prices that AviationValues’ analysts and researchers uncover, AviationValues plots the daily market value performance for the entire range of commercial passenger aircraft types. A selection of these, averaged by month, are presented in the figure below, plotting the value that a five-year-old aircraft would have achieved at any point during the Covid-19 period. For comparison purposes the values of each aircraft type are indexed to its value of just before the start of the pandemic, on January 1, 2020. This enables a view of how aircraft values have been affected by the market, rather than by natural age depreciation. The index of the market low for each aircraft type, as well as its current value, is called out in the following table.

Figure 3 illustrates a trifurcation of the market among:

1. The top performers: new technology narrowbody and widebody twinjet aircraft such as Airbus’ A320neo and A350, Boeing’s 787 families (the 737 MAX was already grounded during much of the pandemic).

2. The middle performers: classic technology narrowbody and widebody twinjet aircraft such as the Boeing 737-800, Boeing 777-300ER, Airbus A320ceo and Airbus A330ceo.

3. The low performers: the large widebody quadjets: the Airbus A380 and Boeing 747.

Top Performers

New technology twins refer to aircraft types with two engines that have been recently introduced into service or whose features, e.g., new technology engines, and/or fabrication of the primary fuselage structure, is out of composite rather than aluminium. Representing a significant technological or fuel efficiency advance over the preceding generation of aircraft. They include the following aircraft types:

• Airbus A220 family

• Airbus A320neo family

• Airbus A330neo family

• Airbus A350 family

• Boeing 737 MAX family

• Boeing 787 family

• Embraer E190/E195-E2 family

Market values for these aircraft types have largely recovered to their pre-Covid-19 (January 1, 2020) levels on a fixed age basis, and in some cases have now exceeded them.

Middle Performers

Classic technology twins refer to aircraft types with two engines that have recently ceased production having been superseded by new technology twins. However, they still retain a substantial presence of the overall fleet in current service. These include:

• Airbus A320ceo family

• Airbus A330ceo family

• Boeing 737 Next Generation family

• Boeing 777 family

• Embraer E190/E195 family

The demand for classic technology aircraft is driven to a large extent by their cost benefit relative to the new technology types that supersede them. In recent months, the availability of new technology replacement aircraft has been constrained by supply chain issues across all the manufacturers, and this has increased demand for classic technology aircraft as alternative lift.

Market values for the middle performers are generally still below their pre-Covid-19 levels on a fixed age basis, but are increasing.

Low Performers

The swift drop in international demand following the imposition of Covid-19 travel restrictions impacted the largest passenger aircraft, all of which feature four engines, particularly heavily:

• Airbus A380

• Boeing 747-8I

• Boeing 747-400

Market values for these types remain significantly below where they were prior to the pandemic.

Traditionally reserved for the longest range and highest capacity routes, the widebody quadjets have for decades seen a steady erosion of their market share in favor of higher frequency services operated by medium and large twinjets that can service long-range routes more efficiently.

This “fragmentation” effect first became noticeable in the 1980s on transatlantic routes where the advent of the Boeing 767 twinjet enabled direct services between secondary city pairs rather than funnelling passengers into Boeing 747s flying the New York London route. The introduction of the Boeing 777-200ER in 1997 and 777-300ER in 2004, enabled a similar expansion of transpacific routes beyond trunk routes such as Los Angeles Tokyo. New technology types have accelerated this trend, with even single aisle types such as the A321neo now used in regular service across the Atlantic and the 737 MAX 8 serving London Heathrow from Halifax, Canada.

This has left the largest quadjets deployed on high-capacity trunk routes where they were dependent on high passenger demand to offset their high trip cost. It was inevitable that they would be parked.

As demand has returned, the quadjets face the additional hurdle of being the most expensive to prepare for return to service and have lagged the recovery of smaller aircraft.

That being said, a number of operators have now reactivated at least a portion of their quadjet fleet, including Air China (747-400, 747-8); Asiana (747-400, A380); All Nippon Airways (A380); British Airways (A380); the dominant A380 operator Emirates (A380); Korean Air (A380, 747-8); the dominant 747 operator Lufthansa (747-400, 747-8, A380); Qantas (A380); Qatar (A380); and Singapore Airlines (A380).

Conclusion

The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the commercial passenger aircraft industry was unprecedented. Faced with near-zero passenger revenue opportunities on most international routes and severely curtailed demand on domestic services, airlines made drastic cuts to their active fleets.

AviationValues’ data shows a clear distinction between the highest performing aircraft, mostly new technology twin engine types; and the large four-engine widebodies that have struggled the most from a utilization and value point of view.

The market has proved largely resilient, but the recovery in both utilization and market value has very much depended on the aircraft type. Passenger demand rebounded first in domestic markets, for which smaller narrowbodies were the initial beneficiaries. Only more recently has the long-haul international travel on which widebody utilization depends started to come back.

The recovery in demand for passenger aircraft has been coupled with a constraint in supply of new deliveries, as well as available slots for maintenance due to well publicized supply chain issues. This has resulted in upward pressure on market values across the board for aircraft that are already in service.

Former NTSB and FAA air safety investigator Jeff Guzzetti tells the story of how a single unsecured bolt led to a deadly crash of a DC-8 cargo plane and the eventual demise of an airline.

Readers of Aviation Maintenance may recall my article published in March 2020 about Alaska Airlines flight 261, an MD-82 that crashed off the coast of California (www.avm-mag.com/from-c-check-to-tragedy-lessons-learned-from-alaska-flight-261) in January 2000. While investigating that accident, my NTSB colleagues launched on yet another maintenance-related crash that occurred about 400 miles north of where Alaska 261 went down. This second crash occurred on February 16, 2000 — 16 days after Alaska 261 — and involved a Douglas DC-8 airliner operated by Emery Worldwide Airlines (see main image) as flight 17. The accident received less attention than Alaska 261, perhaps because it was “only” a cargo flight that had no passengers. Still, three crewmembers died, and the findings from the investigation continue to echo lessons that every mechanic and maintenance manager should heed.

Emery flight 17 slammed into an automobile salvage yard less than two minutes after lifting off from runway 22L at Mather Airport in Sacramento, California, while attempting to return to the airport for an emergency landing. The 43-year-old captain, 35-year-old first officer, and 38-year-old flight engineer perished in the accident. The airplane was destroyed by impact forces and a massive post-crash fire (see graphic 2). The jet was destined for Dayton, Ohio, with 31 tons of cargo in its hold, lighter than usual.

Extreme C.G. Problem

A few seconds after takeoff, the crew declared an emergency with air traffic control (ATC). The last radio call from the DC-8 was: “Emery 17, extreme C.G. problem.” Additional communications were eventually recovered from the voice and data recorders (CVR and FDR), which investigators overlaid on the accident flight path (see graphic 3). The overlay shows that as the DC-8 lifted off, it entered a left turn and the nose continued to rise upward. The crew pushed on the control column to get the nose down, but to no avail. They looped around to the left for the emergency landing and began to descend. The crew added power which helped a bit, but the DC-8 banked to the left and began to descend. That’s when the captain radioed his “extreme” problem with the C.G., or center of gravity.

The cargo plane’s left wing contacted the edge of a two-story building and careened into the automobile salvage yard, striking hundreds of cars and exploding into a torrent of flame. The wreckage was strewn over an area of about 1,500 feet long (see graphics 4 and 5). The fuselage was broken into several sections, along with the engines, landing gear, flight controls, wing sections, and stabilizers. Large portions of the airframe and its cargo were disintegrated or consumed by fire.

Cargo Shift or Flight Control Jam?

Most accidents that I have investigated involved one or more “red herrings” — pieces of information that can mislead or distract from the truth. For Emery flight 17, the “C.G.” comments served as the red herrings. Investigators spent days with the grim task of sifting through a mix of burnt aircraft and automobile parts, attempting to identify remnants of cargo flooring and tie-down components, in search of a potential cargo tie-down problem or load shift. Other go-team members worked off-site at locations where the airplane was loaded and maintained. They conducted ground crew interviews and perused records. The loading for the accident flight was routine, and the airplane was operated within its prescribed center of gravity limits and weight limitations.

Meanwhile, NTSB specialists back in Washington DC analyzed flight recorder data and compared it to previous cargo-related accidents like the Fine Air DC-8 cargo crash in Miami in 1997. The data from Emery flight 17 did not indicate a cargo shift, or a C.G. that was out of limits. Instead, they noticed anomalies with the movement of the elevators and the airplane pitch attitude which were consistent with a flight control malfunction. As a result, investigators at the accident site prioritized the identification of elevator control system components.

The DC-8’s elevator system is “tab-driven.” The cockpit control columns are mechanically linked to the elevator control tabs, and the deflection of the control tabs in flight results in deflection of the elevators which results in changes in the airplane’s up/down pitch attitude. Each elevator control tab is hinged to the inboard trailing edge of the associated elevator surface, then connected by a mechanical linkage that includes a crank fitting, pushrod, and bell crank (see graphics 6 and 7). Two pushrods, attached to the inboard and outboard ends of the elevator geared tabs, connect the tabs to the horizontal stabilizers’ rear spar. As the elevator position changes in relation to the horizontal stabilizer, linkages move the elevator geared tabs in the opposite direction, providing an aerodynamic boost in moving the elevators to reduce the control force required by the pilots.

A Missing Bolt

Examination of the elevator components at the crash site revealed a missing bolt at the right elevator control tab crank fitting where the control tab pushrod is normally attached. The pushrod was recovered separately and remained intact at the missing bolt location. Investigators were curious to see indications of contact damage on the forward edges of the right crank fitting (see graphics 8 and 9). There was no physical damage or other evidence indicating that the bolt failed or fractured, and failure of an installed castellated nut and/or cotter pin during normal operation would be very unlikely. The Board surmised: The bolt must have separated because it had not been properly secured; that is, the required castellated nut was either never installed, or it was improperly installed (for example, installed without a cotter pin).

By utilizing an exemplar DC-8 aircraft, the NTSB conducted tests on the elevator flight controls to identify the effects of a free pushrod when disconnected from its control tab. The testing revealed that a disconnected control tab would result in a mismatch between the left and right trim tab of 25 degrees throughout the range of control column travel. The testing further revealed that the disconnected control tab would be deflected about twice as far, and in an opposite direction to, the other control tab, even if the control columns were commanded full forward by the pilots (i.e., nose down).

After reviewing the behavior of the elevators during the previous 25 hours of recorded flight information on the FDR, the NTSB surmised that the bolt connecting the right elevator control tab crank fitting to the pushrod migrated out of its fitting at some time after the previous takeoff and before the accident takeoff. This allowed the control tab to disengage from its pushrod and shift to a trailing edge down position. When the aerodynamic forces increased as the airplane accelerated during the takeoff roll, the right elevator control tab crank fitting contacted the disconnected pushrod, restricting the control tab movement upward (see graphic 10). As a result of this deflection, the DC-8’s elevator surfaces were driven to an extreme airplane nose-up pitch attitude. Despite the pilots’ best efforts to push down on the control columns, they were unable to overcome the effects of the jam.

Clues in the Maintenance Records and Procedures

Investigators poured over the DC-8’s maintenance records for clues as to why the control tab bolt was not secured properly. Emery contracted most of their maintenance to an overhaul facility in Tennessee which performed the accident airplane’s most recent D-check. The MRO records indicated that the elevator assemblies, including their control tabs, had been replaced with overhauled assemblies during a D-7 check completed three months before the crash.

A review of Emery’s aircraft records indicated that the elevators were touched again a few weeks later during the airplane’s most recent B-check inspection, which was conducted overnight at Emery’s facility in Dayton three weeks before the accident. Emery’s DC-8 work card for this B-2 inspection was titled “RH and LH Horizontal Stabilizer External Surface Inspection.” Interviews with all the mechanics involved with the D-7 and B-2 checks revealed that no one specifically remembered working with the elevators, but they were able to correctly describe the procedure. The NTSB was unable to determine if the source of the unsecured bolt was from the most recent D inspection or the subsequent B-check maintenance. In the end, the probable cause was cited as “a loss of pitch control resulting from the disconnection of the right elevator control tab” which was “caused by the failure to properly secure and inspect the attachment bolt.”

More Discoveries

Investigators also discovered deficiencies and inconsistencies in the DC-8 manuals and work cards provided by the manufacturer, and those developed by the airline. For example, the applicable maintenance manual reference for the elevator check revealed that no hardware requirements were specified for the missing bolt location, and no specific instructions were provided for the inspection requirements of this installation.

Emery conducted a post-crash fleet inspection of its DC-8 elevators and reported that cotter pins were correctly installed on all of its DC-8 control tab pushrods at their forward and aft ends. However, they also discovered that the bolts installed at the aft pushrod connections were oriented opposite to that depicted in the DC-8 manual on 11 aircraft. Three pushrods were damaged and one was found installed backwards.

The agency made several safety recommendations to the FAA to require improvements with the DC-8 elevator rigging procedures and other aircraft specific components. Several more recommendations were issued for all aircraft and airlines to address deficiencies with the accuracy and management of maintenance manuals, illustrated parts catalogs, and task documents used to accomplish maintenance. The FAA acted on most of these recommendations.

The Rest of the Story

The story of Emery flight 17 began before the DC-8 slammed into the salvage yard. The airline had been hurting financially, and safety took a back seat in the maintenance department. About a month before the accident, the FAA placed Emery under a “heightened state of oversight” because FAA inspectors observed numerous apparent violations of the Federal Air Regulation (FARs) with maintenance.

Following the accident, the FAA conducted more special inspections of the airline and uncovered over a hundred apparent violations of the FARs, including improper repairs, repetitive pilot write-ups of the same problem on the same aircraft, unapproved aircraft installations/alterations, operations of unairworthy aircraft, procedural non-compliance of their manuals, and inadequate record keeping. Additionally, the FAA announced proposed fines totaling $198,000 because the airline operated one DC-8 without proper maintenance, and another aircraft without compliance with an airworthiness directive.

Emery also drew the NTSB’s attention with more incidents. One involved maintenance workers installing the wrong landing gear component in one of its remaining DC-8s, leaving the crew unable to lower its landing gear. In another incident, an Emery plane conducted an emergency landing in Denver after an engine failure and loss of cabin pressure that occurred due to the failure of a clamp that secured the high-pressure air duct.

After 19 months under this heightened oversight, on August 13, 2001, Emery signed an agreement with the FAA to immediately cease operating until it resolved the safety issues. Ultimately, the airline was unable to do so and surrendered its operating certificate on December 4, 2002 — less than two years after Emery flight 17. Emery’s cargo operations were subcontracted to other airlines and its successor company was later acquired by UPS in 2004.

Emery Worldwide, which had been one of the leading carriers in the cargo airline world for decades, was defunct. Its economic health may have been the cited reason for its demise, but the flight 17 accident was ultimately the back-breaker that served as the tip of the iceberg which indicated a larger problem beneath the surface of a weak maintenance program that did not receive the care it needed.