HOEING

PUBLISHED QUARTERLY
IRLIN JANUARY·MARCH 1986

~~~~!RTrS~lJlIIi~ClURES EVOltrTlON
• NO DESTlWCTtVt NSPECTIONS
• GI Al AVIONICS TRAINING
Quarterly AIRLINER January·March 1986

PUSUIU c.ltin SlbOkt and fin! .•................... I TIe BOEING AIRLINER iJ published quancrly by the
CommemaI AitpIaue ComplLlly of The BOEING ComplLlly.
SboriDl Ouuized Carao t. • 80elnR 747 ..d 167 •.•.... 5 Smtlle. WashinllOft., CIIbk Mklrua. BOEING-A.IR. AddlUl aU
JEt Tl'1UISport S1rWCttrra Ewlutloo•.••••..•••••.•.•.. 9 eommunkatlOfts to Clulomer 5e:rvlce5 OrpniUlloQ. Tbe
Nondestructl.e Wp«dOIli 0( IIlSt:"Kt BOEING ee.nplLll),. Bol 3107. Smtlle WubinJ!oa 911124.
BodAI Airplana - Pan 2 . • . • . .. • . . . .. . • . . • . • . •. 17
Informaliol1 pubUshtd in the BOEING AIRLINER is considered
Digital A'rionks Trainlna ...•...•••...•.....•.•.•.•. 2J lICCUnllte and aurhoriUltive. HO'A'ever, DO I1Ulteriai should be
Fuel ConRrYatiOil &: Opt.ratiou consk1tted as FAA approv«l unleM: specirtcally sUIted A.irline
Newsletter .•....••...•.....•........ Center Pulloul personnel are advised thaI their company's policy I'l\IlY reatm
Cuslomer Support Representatins ....••.....•. Back"Re lbe dirtct use of published inronnation.

Cwlomer airlines may republish articlea from the BOEING

BOElNG CO~t:MERCIAL AIRPLAl\'E COl\lPANY AIRLINER for distribution only wilhin their own orpnization
without wrinen permission by &55uminll responsibility for Ihe
current aoctllllC)' of the republished I'l\Ilteria.l. All OIhen mUSI
Vice Presideal-Cu$tomer ServIces DI'lsloD ...•• G.D. Nibil'. obtain wril1en permission from Boeiq bdore reprinliq any
Vke Preside-nl-Flight Operations 8.5. Wygle anklea from !he AIRLINER 10 ensure that aU I'l\Ilteriai conforms
Vke PresJdenl-oastomer Suppo" •.•.•••••••• D.O. Cruze to latest mformalioa and ch'l1Jea when published.

Copyricht 1986 The 8oeln, ComI*JY

Airli.er Sbfr-
S.pemstna EdiIM ........•..............• R.L OldMl
P.b1k21tions Editor ••••••••••••••••••••••••• A.T. Uoyd
De&ip •••.••••..•••.•.•••.•••••••••.• D.W. Copelaad

PERSONAL AIRLINER SUBSCRIPTIONS

NOW AVAIlABLE
,---------------------l
NUM ,

The Boeinll AIRLINER ml"uine II. and will conlinue Lo

Addrtll _ I
be. dRuihuled al no cost to Boeing jetliner operators u I
lOo'elillS 10 llSSOCiate and lubconlrw:tOl"l. 1be same .pplid
a" _ I
10 amlion rellulalOry .~ ••ffected 000 comll1lU1ds, I
and oeruin educabOnal institulions. The mapzines are
bulk·ihippcd 10. speofic oIra .itlnn ea::h or"BlUtlOll
Coo.", _
""'" - - - - I
for internal d!5lribu1l0J\.

The AlJlUNER mapZ1ne II available for penonaI

Cbeclt number of IUb8criptions al 135.00
ea::h:
D I
I
I
wbKripbOnl at the nu dSJ5.oo U.S per year (appiiclbk I
SUIte and IocaJ lUeS .in be ~ RdurnlO: BOEING AIRLINER MAGAZINE
Altn: filWlCC:. M·9120
I
"J'boK .idunllO $uts:ribe lOr ~ coptea sbollld SoC:Dd M.aiI Stop 03-06 I
their checks, p.yable 10 BOEING AIRLINER P.O. 8m: 3701 I
MAGAZINE. IOtbeMklra.sbownCIII tbe(orm. Nobillin, Seattle. W~ U.S.A.. 911124 I
sYSImI II .vai1abk. L ~

On lhe Cover. Neilher ratn.. lIeec nor IOOW shall deter Boeiq Aigtll Tesl: CI'nI'$. This 767 1O'ali
pholovapb«l by Pal JohlUOll. night lest photographer. lIS ilwlcd out from lhe
Boeitlg Flight Center.
 Smf)keandFire

PASSENGER CABIN SMOKE AND FTRE

by
Ernie Campbell
Flight Training Technical

uccess or failure during an emergency depends on purpose of this article is to discuss tbe above subjects and

S the flight crew following the procedures prescribed

in the operations manual. This is particularly
important in the case of passenger cabin fires. A review
other related topics and to provide guidelines on both what
to do and what not to do when smoke or fire is detected
in the passenger cabin.
of inflight smoke and fire accidents and incidents indicates
that flight crews have taken incorrect action to deal with Fire Prevention
the situation. One of the most common errors made is
shutting down air conditioning packs in an attempt to Fire prevention is used in a broad sense here to describe
smother the fire. Other incorrect procedures noted have activities of the flight attendants related to safe house-
been deployment of the passenger oxygen masks, primary keeping practices. continuous alertness for unsafe passen-
flight crewmember leaving the cock.pit to fight the fire and ger actions and immediate action to eliminate situations
delay in proceeding to the nearest suitable airport. The involving potential for fire.

AIRLINER/JAN-MAR 1m - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I
 Training of the flight attendants in fire prevention should It is not possible to smother a passenger cabin fire inflight
emphasize one primary concept - continuous vigilance. The air flow required to maintain adequate cabin pressure
In particular, their attention should be directed to the to sustain life is far greater than the air flow necessary
lavatories. Periodic checks of the lavatories by the flight to support combustion. The passengers would become
attendants is desired to assure that no smoke is present incapacitated by the lack of oxygen long before the fire
and good housekeeping exists. Trash compartments could be smothered. Due to the low human tolerance to
should be checked to ensure waste disposal doors are smoke and toxic gases, maximum cabin ventilation is far
closed and trash containers are not overflowing. more productive in protecting passenger lives. Whenever
possible, the passengers should be moved away from the
Another area that should be of concern to flight attendants smoke source.
is the lower sidewall in the passenger cabin. On occasion,
items have ignited in this area and not immediately been Passenger Oxygen Mask
observed because normal cabin air flow carried the smoke
and fumes through the return air griU and away from the Passenger oxygen system is intended for use only in case
passengers. The flighl attendants should maintain surveil· of cabin pressurization loss and should not be used during
lance of the floor areas, particularly in the smoking zones; a cabin fire. Passenger oxygen masks are not useful as
enforce NO SMOKING rules in restricted areas, espe- smoke masks as the majority of lhe breathing air in the
cially in the lavatories; and keep clothing, bags, papers, oxygen masks comes from cabin air through the mask
etc., from being deposited where they may become a fire inhalation valve. Thus, a significant portion of any smoke
hazard. in the cabin would be inhaled. In addition, another hazard
exists in an active gaseous oxygen system as a bum-
An additional area of concern is smoke resulling from through in the pressurized oxygen distribution lines could
electrical malfunctions in such components as light also accelerate the fire.
ballast, galleys and toilet flush mOlors. In some cases, the
familiar smell of burning wire insulation will nOl be
presenl and it may be difficult to identify the problem as
an electrical anomaly. One indication that the smoke
source may be electrical is a tripped circuil breaker,
especially if it cannot be reset. The Boeing recommenda-
tion for any tripped circuit breaker is that only one reset
attempt be made. Jr it is probable that the smoke source
is electrical, the cockpit crew should be advised to
complete the electrical smoke and fire procedures.

AJthough there is nothing complicated about passenger

cabin fire prevention procedures, there are compelling
reasons why they should be emphasized. Fire prevention
is an activity which the flighl attendants should practice
every day as pan of their normal duties.

Smoke Evacuation Procedures

It is very important that the prescribed Smoke Evacuation

procedures in the Operations Manual be followed closely
without any additions or deletions to the checklist steps.

The general procedure for smoke evacuation is to

MAXIMIZE ventilation to the greatest extent possible by
operating all air conditioning packs, increasing the cabin
altitude without deploying the oxygen masks and main-
taining an engine thrust setting that will provide maximum
air flow from the air conditioning systems. To maintain
adequate thrust for air conditioning flow for effective
smoke removal during descent, it may be necessary to
increase drag by extending the speedbrakes and/or lower-
ing the landing gear.

One of the most common deviations from the Smoke

Evacuation checklist is the shutting down of one or more Use of wet towels oller the nose and mouth
air conditioning packs in an attempt to smother the fire. effectively reduces ingestion of toxic gases.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986
2
 A cabin fire gutted the
interior of this aircraft.

Maximum use or cabin

nntilatiOD will reduce
temperatures and improve
evacuation or toxic gases;
thereby making a nre
more controllable.

Rather than using the passenger oxygen masks to assist hydrogen fluoride) and hydrogen cyanide. While breatlt-
breathing in a smoke environment, the most effective aid ing through itemsofclotlting will also help filter out smoke
is to instruct the passenge~ to breathe through wet towels particles, clothing is generally less effective than wet
or cloths. A National Transporation Safety Board report towels in filtering out tlte acid gases and hydrogen cyanide.
on a rC(;ent accident involving an inflight fire indicated Neither filter system will reduce carbon monoxide concen-
that virtually all of the surviving passengers stated that tration. The initiative on the part of night attendants to
they had covered their mouths and noses with wet towels, distribute wet towels and instruct the passengers to
articles of clotlling or other like items as instructed by breathe through tlte towels or otlter items of clothing will
flight attendants. Wet towels aid in filtering out smoke aid the survival of tlte passengers.
particles and acid gases (such as hydrogen chloride and

AIRLINER/JAN-MAR 1986 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3
 Crew Duties Having established that a smoke or fire condition exists
in the passenger cabin, the cockpit crew should keep the
The cockpit crewmembers are situation managers and not flight attendants advised on time remaining before landing
firefighters. During a passenger cabin fire, the primary and to prepare for an immediate emergency evacuation
cockpit crewmembef'3, MUST remain at their stations to as soon as the airplane stops.
operate the system controls, accomplish smoke evacuation
procedures, carry out emergency communications with air All operators are encouraged to review their crew
traffic control and to accomplish diversion to nearest emergency communications procedures to ensure that
suitable airport, etc. The flight attendants must be trained urgent calls made by a flight attendant to the cockpit can
to aggressively fight the fire and keep the captain informed be easily indentified over a routine call.
of the conditions in the passenger cabin.
Crew Training
Another problem involved in having a primary crewmem-
ber leave the cockpit to fight the fire is that the The importance of crew training in firefighting and smoke
crewmember could be incapacitated by the smoke or fire evacuation cannot be overemphasized; particularly
and be unable to return to the cockpit. This could result cooperation, coordination and communications between
in only one pilot in the cockpit during an emergency the cockpit and cabin crew. Whenever possible, it is
situation. recommended that the flight attendants, flight engineers,
and pilots attend the same firefighting and passenger
All actions required to accomplish a diversion, such as evacuation training program.
emergency communications with Air Trame Control, a
review of smoke evacuation procedures, should be accom- Summary
plished as soon as possible. There have been cases where
smoke became so dense in the cockpit that flight crew- If a passenger cabin smoke or fire condition is detected
members could not read the checklist. Unless the smoke in flight:
source is in the cockpit, do not open cockpit windows to
evacuate smoke. If over or near a suitable airport, an What Not To Do
emergency descent may be appropriate. However, the
descent should be delayed to take advantage of the higher • Do not shut down air conditioning pack or reduce
true aif'3,peed which wiU reduce flight time if the nearest ventilation in an attempt to smother fire.
airport is still some distance away. Fuel dumping (if
installed) should be considered if time permits. • Do not deploy passenger oxygen masks.

Firefighting and Di'fersiOD to Nearest Airport • Primary cockpit crewmembers should not leave their
seats during an emergency.
When a fire situation has developed, the flight attendant
who first notices the smoke or fire should obtain the What To Do
nearest appropriate fire extinguisher and immediately
auack the fire. Simultaneous with this activity, a second • Flight attendants must aggressively fight the fire.
Oight attendant should immediately notify the captain. A
Oight auendant must maintain continuous communica- • A flight attendant must immediately notify the captain
tion with the captain to provide accurate information as and keep him advised of the situation in the cabin.
to the state of the emergency. This is essential to enable
the captain to make correct decisions to ensure safety of • Immediately proceed to the nearest suitable airport.
flight. An immediate decision to land at the nearest The flight should only be continued if it can be
suitable airport should be made. The flight should only positively determined that the fire has been
be continued to the destination if it can be positively extinguished.
determined that the fire has been extinguished.
• Establish and maintain MAXIMUM ventilation to
Cre", Communications evacuate smoke.

Also noted during the review of airplane inflight smoke • Complete smoke evacuation checklist.
and fire accidents and incidents was lack of timely
communications from the flight attendants to the cockpit • Cockpit crew keep flight attendants advised on altitude
crew advising them of the emergency. It appears that flight and time remaining to landing.
attendants are reluctant to contact the captain, especially
during takeoff and climb or during descent and landing • Be prepared for an immediate passenger evacuation
when the cockpit crew is busy. Additionally, when after landing.
emergency calls are made to the cockpit, the urgency of
the situation is not always made clear to the captain.

4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986
 Out ized

The cargo capacity of the 747 Freighter is shown here. The helicopter shown
in the Inset is an example of outsized cargo carried on the airplane.

Shoring Outsized Cargo in a Boeing 747 and 767

by
David L McKnight

his article ootlines the improved cargo carrying was prompted by operators who wished to have an easy

T capabilities as set forth in the document entitled

Shoring Gu.idelin.es for Outsized Corgo. Shoring is
a term used to describe the utilization ofbeams to spread
and accurate method of determining shoring schemes. As
a result, the availibility or this document has expanded the
capability or the airplane to carry outsized cargo due to
out cargo loads beyond the cargo dimensions by providing the improved analysis procedure and the minimal time
effective load redistn"bution. Outsized refen to cargo required to perronn it. Now an operator needs to
which, without adequate shoring, would excood allowable coordinate with The Boeing Company on an individual
structural limits as set forth in the Weight and Balance basis only ror tbose items outside tbe scope or this
Manual. document.

Prior 10 the development of this document, Boring The document Shoring Guidelines for Outsized CtJrgo
addressed outsized cargo questions on an individual basis. (Document No. [)6.35527 ror 747 and D636TOO2 ror 767)
10 most cases OpenllOrS would submit a suggested shoring is currently available through Boeing Customer
scheme and Boeing "'ould analyze it and recommend Engineering.
changes as necessary. The devdopmenl of this document

AlRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5
 Development of a Sborillg Scheme pyramiding is a simple yet effective way to ensure that
cargo weighl is uniformly distributed to the noor. In
To ensure tbat cargo can be carried safely in a 747 and Figure I is an example of what pyramiding might look like
767 so as not 10 jepordize the safety of crew or aircran when the area load limit is exceeded.
and to minimize localized damage to the airplane floor or
cargo system components (rollers, for example), airplane When cargo exceeds the linear load limit, cargo weight
structural limits must be followed as published in the must be redistributed in the forward and aft directions to
747 and 767 Weight and Balance Manuals. In the Weighl bring the linear load (cargo load per linear inch in the
and Balance Manual there are four limits that must be fore-an direction) below the linear load limit. This can be
observed: (I) Linear Load Limits. (2) Area Load Limits, done with pyramiding, but in many cases, due to height
(3) Companment Load Limits, and (4) Shear Curve or restrictions, cargo volume and density, pyramiding is
Cumulative Load Limits, incapable of properly redistributing cargo weight. A
shoring scheme ulilizing longitudinal shoring (as shown
• Linear load limits are specified in pounds per inch in Figure 2) provides an alternative method of
along the fuselage. The linear load limil defines the redistributing weight in the fore-aft directions.
maximum weight per inch which can be carried by the
airplane structure.

• Area load limits are specified in pounds per square

foot. The area load limit defines Ihe maximum weighl
per square foot which can be applied to Ihe airplane
floor sturcture.

• Compartment limits are specified in pounds. The

compartment limit defines the maximum weight that
can be carried in the various cargo compartments of
the airplane.

• Shear curve limits are specified in pounds. The shear

curve defines the maximum cumulative weight or
shear that can be carried at a given station.

Shoring is required for cargo which, by virtue of its size

and/or weight, would exceed linear load limits and/or
area load limits. Shoring can not increase the allowable
compartment load limits or shear curve limits.
Figure I. Spacer blocks and beams used in pyramiding
Redistributed weight is the weight of cargo which is not permit uniform load distribution of outsized cargo along
directly supported by the floor under tile cargo foot print, the floor.
but is distributed by shoring beyond the cargo dimensions.
For shoring to be effective, enough weight must be
redistributed so that the area load limit and/or linear load
limit are no longer eJ[ceeded. The sboring document helps
an operalordetermine adequate shoring for three different
cases: (I) the area load limit is exceeded, (2) the linear load
limit is is exceeded, and (3) both the area load limit and
the linear load limit are eJl:ceeded.

Once the need for shoring has been established, a shoring

scheme must be determined. A shoring scheme is any of
the factors such as shoring stiffness, material, or shoring
dimensions, which make a shoring arrangement distinct.

When cargo exceeds the area load limit, cargo weight must
be redistributed out from under the cargo foot print. The
most effective way of redistributing weight is by use of the
pyramiding techniquE. Pyramiding is any type of shoring
which uses beams and spacer blocks to redistribute cargo
weight in an approximately uniform manner over the full Figure 2. The use of longitudinal shoring beams provides
shoring length. The use of beams and spacer blocks to form an alternative method of redistributing weight in a fore
and aft direction.

6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AlRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986
 To redistribute a portion of any concentrated load,
longitudinal shoring must be capable of providing
adequate stiffness and strength. Airplane floor stiffness,
shoring stiffness, shoring length and free spans (the length
of longitudinal shoring which extends beyond the cargo
foot print in the fore/aft direction) affect the ability of the
longitudinal shoring 10 redistribute cargo loads.

In the shoring document a graphical technique as shown

in Figure 3 is used to select an appropriate shoring stiffness
and shoring length for a wide range of weights and cargo
lengths. The graphs are separated into groups due to
differences in airplane floor stiffness and load capacity.
These curves are a function of linear load limit, location
in the airplane. cargo length, shoring length and cargo
weight. When cargo exceeds the linear load limit and
longitudinal shoring is used. an operator can detennine
an adequate longitudinal shoring stiffness/shoring length
Figure 3. This graph is an example of the graphical
by entering the appropriate graph at the applicable total
shoring technique which is shown in the shoring document,
weight, read across to an appropriate shoring length and
down to the minimum required shoring stiffness.

Many combinations of shoring stiffness and shoring length

will satisfactorily carry a given payload. This allows a user
to select a scheme which best suits their particular needs,
thus granting the greatest flexibility possible while
maintaining structural integrity. An operator's need to
minimize shoring length, shoring weight, and shoring
height will dictate which of the allowable shoring length/
required shoring stiffness combinations are to be used.
After an operator has chosen a shoring stiffness/shoring
length combination, an appropriate beam type and
quantity can be selected. rt is acceptable to use beam
lengths in excess oftbose specified; however, longer beams
would be ineffective in funher redistributing any
significant cargo load.

When cargo exceeds both the area load limit and linear
load limit, longitudinal shoring wiJI be required and lateral
shoring may be required. An operator can determine a
shoring scheme by combining the procedures set forth in
the first two cases as is demonstrated in the shoring
document. Figure 4 is an example of what a shoring
scheme might look like when both the area load limit and
the linear load limit are exceeded. Figure 4. This is an example of a shoring technique
which may be used if the cargo exceeds both the area load
limit and the linear load limit of the noor.
Development of Shoring Stiffness Graphs

Development of the graphical technique of solving for

longitudinal lihoring Sliffnesses as shown in Figure 3 is The use of shoring does not enable the linear load limit
the key element which enables operators to easily and to be exceeded. Therefore. directly under the footprint of
accurately detennineshoring requirements. These shoring the cargo, the airplane structure is capable of carrying a
stiffness graphs are developed by modeling the longi- load equal to the product of cargo length and linear load
tudinaJ lihoring on a continuous foundation capable of limit. Weight in excess of this must be redistributed in the
deformations. forward and aft directions.

AIRLINER/JAN-MAR 1986 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ 7
 This cuh'ert pipe is anotber example of outsized cargo.

The amount of weight that is actually redistributed for Figure 5). Given the cargo weight, cargo length, linear
any shoring length/required shoring stiffness combination load limit, floor stiffness, and shoring length, solving for
can be calculated by determining the shear in the shoring the required shoring stiffness/shoring length is now just
at the edge of the cargo foot print (Section A-A in an iterative process such that the shear at A-A is equal
to the weight that must be redistributed.

Once a possible required shoring stiffness/shoring length

combination has been found, a check must be made along
the entire length of the beam/elastic foundation interface
for positive beam deflections. If beams experience positive
deflections anywhere along the beam length, the shoring
scheme must be rejected as not being fully effective.

The shoring stiffness plots are a graphical solution of the

check for positive deflections and the iterative process of
determining shoring stiffnesses.

In conclusion, the shoring document provides a step by

step approach through the complete shoring process. In
it, the elements of shoring are analyzed to achieve the
maximum effectiveness of a particular shoring scheme.
The shoring document gives an operator the maximum
flexibility in determining a shoring scheme while ensuring
that airplane structural limits are not exceeded. Operator
requests for copies of the shoring documents should be
directed to: Boeing Commercial Airplane Company,
Figure S. The weight redistribution (or any shoring Attention: 747/767 Customer Engineering, Seattle, WA
length/required shoring stiffness combination may be 98124.
determined by calculating the shear in tbe shoring at tbe
edge of the cargo foot print.

8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A 1 R L I N E R / J A N - M A R 1986

.
 Figure 1. The Boeing Model 367·80 was the prototype for the family of jetliners.

JET TRANSPORT SfRUcrURES EVOLUTION

by
Ull G. Goranson
Structures Technology

Dash.sO Prototype
he profound changes in our world civilization

T during the last 40 yean have been significantly

affected by aviation, which in [Urn has been
based on the evolution of the jet engine. During the last
Boeing decided, in 1952, to privately finance and build a
commercial prototype initiaUy called 707 and later desig-
nated the 367-80. (Figure I.) The Dash-80 was designed
30 yean The Boeing Company has introduced new types with a low wing to facilitate a long-body deck for carrying
of commericial jet aircraft or major derivatives on an passengers and/or freight. The intent was to sell the 707
average of about once a year. concept as both a commercial airplane and a military
tanker. Building a big prototype airplane with private
This article provides a historical perspective of the money was not a very common undertaking, and the
structural technology evolution that has led to the modem Dash-8Q game staked approximately one quarter of
and efficient commercial jet transportation system of Boeing's total net worth on the conviction that turbojets
today. The Dash-80 pioneered the development ofthe long were the right way to go. The U.S. Air Force held a jet
line of 707 commercial transports. Boeing has since tanker competition in 1953 to meet the B-47 and B-52
produced more than 50% of the commercial jet transpons refuel requirements. By the time we had the Dash-80
in operation today. The evolutionary process of applying prototype up and nying, it became possible to make
new structural concepts and materials as we progressed unbeatable delivery guarantees. The first U.S. Air Force
from the 707 to the 767 is illustrated by some of the contract for the KCl35 was awarded in 1954 for the first
following examples for each Boeing model in between. delivery in 1957.

AIRLINER/JAN-MAR 1986 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9
 Boeing recognized the importance ofboth commercial and
military design requirements during the development of
the dash 80 prototype. Particular auention was given to
stringenl implementation of fail-safe design features, such
as multiple load path structure, which have been a
mainstay in Boeing jet transport structures ever since.
Multiple wing splices and the careful selection of materials
with slow crack propagation rates are early examples of
fail-safe design considerations. (Figure 2.) These tear
stopping members provide a second defense against
structural damage missed during inspection. The credible
safety record of subsequent jet transports truly reflects the
importance of these design decisions.

The sealed wet wing without fuel bladders is another

example of new design concepts pioneered by the Dash-80. Figure 2. These wing spanwise joints
In addition, the gear development for a swept wing was were early examples of fail-safe design.
no easy task. The gear was connected to an attachment
litting which in tum was cantilevered off the rear spar.
(Figure 3.) Chordwise beavertail fittings were used to
redistribute loads to the swept wing structure.

Model 707

The transition from the KC-13S did not come without

growing pains. The fuselage diameter had to be increased
by four inches for competitive reasons which resulted in
extensive retooling costs. Further market studies also led
to structural wing changes and less commonality with the
KC-t3S. (Figure 4.)

The 107 was designed with increased levels of safety,

reliability and endurance required by the emerging era of
high speed commercial aviation. The 707 wing sweep angle
and thickness configuration were carefully tailored for
less response to turbulence to achieve a more competetive Figure 3. The Model 707 main landing
structural design capable of 6O,<XX> hours oftranscontinen- gear structural support.
tallintemational market usage.

The 707 structure was developed with special emphasis

on selecting materials which provided high fatigue life,
slow crack propagation and high tear resistance (fracture
toughness). 2024 (24ST) aluminum was selected for the
wing lower surface, spars, fuselage skin and empennage
skin and spars. 1178 (78ST) aluminum was used for the
areas with tow tension stresses such as the wing upper
surface. Although 2024 has better crack retarding proper-
ties, structural strength could still be provided with 7178
in order to utilize its higher compression yield strength.

Many tests were conducted to verify both fatigue and

residual strength of structure with damage. The fuselage
structure was hydro-fatigue tested for SO,<XX> cycles as a
result from lessons learned from the British Comet
accidents. The cab structure sustained an additional
20,<XX> cycles. Static tests to destruction plus lessons
learned from .KC13S full scale fatigue testing laid the
foundation for many structural arrangements and material
combinations that have endured the test of time up
through tadays modem jet transports. Figure 4. The Model 707 was derived from the Model 367·80.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AIRLINER/JAN.MAR 1986
10
 Detail design improvements, such as the side-of-body
joints. increased the relative fatigue life by a factor of three
over the Ket35 to meet the commercial operation
requirements. Bottle-pins were used to eliminate deflec-
tions of the body bulkheads attached to the wing. This
minimized deflection induced fatigue stresses in the
fuselage structure. (Figure 5.)

The 707 airframe structure was subjected to substantial

fail-safe testing to verify capability to contain damage and
ability to sustain regulatory loads. These tests provided
assurance that, on a flight-by-flight basis, multi-structural
member designs with tear stoppers performed adequately
for both dynamically extending cracks and cracks that
grow slowly. During several guillotine tests, fifteen inch
Figure 5. Bottle pins are used in steel knives were dropped through either skin, frame and
the Model 707 wing-body joint. tear-straps or skin and stringers of simulated fuselage
sections under pressure to demonstrate the dynamic crack
arrest capability. (Figure 6.)

Although the commercial 707 production line was closed

in 1978 after more than 900 airplanes had been built, this
airplane became a mainstay of the U.s. Air Force E-3
A WACS platform and its derivatives. Boeing has de-
veloped supplemental structural inspection documents for
the 707 which will help operators to assure continuing
airworthiness of a well proven design until economics
dictate retirement.

Model 727

The 727 concept began in 1958 when a program task force

was formed to identify the technology and configuration
that would make a successful short-to--medium range
commercial jet. The 727 designation became the model
number since 717 had been assigned to the KC-t35.
Figure 6. Guillotine tests were ..sed to Several configuration studies proceeded the actual go--
\'erily the fail-safe design of the skin. ahead decision in 1960. Some airlines insisted on four
engines while others wanted a twin engine configuration.
The middle ground proved to be the three-engine airplane
with a high T-tail. (Figure 7.) It could be said that the 727
had two lives. The first began with the initial delivery of
the -100 series in 1963. The second life began in 1970when
a longer body ·200 model with improved noise characteris-
tics, gross weight and payload range was introduced. The
727 held its market position and set an all time record:
over 1800 airplanes were delivered by 1984 when the
production line was closed down.

Structural design parameters were established in the early

configuration stages to ensure that the 727 would tolerate
a long life of high daily use without excessive maintenance.
The design objective ofa 20-year economic life was tripled
to 60,000 flight cycles in comparison with Model 707. The
unique engine and T-tail configuration forced new design
of the fin attachment to the fuselage at multi-stringer
locations instead of previously used discrete terminal
attach fittings. The wing lower surface stringers were also
changed from 7075 used on the 707 to 2024 aluminum to
improve structural durability. The upper wing surface was
Figure 7. A total of 1832 Model 727s were built.

AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1
 retained as 7178. The 727 structural test program was the
most extensive ever conducted at that time. It included
fuU-scale static and fatigue tests and comprehensive flight
load surveys and flutter test programs.

Riveted tearstraps used on the 707 were replaced by

bonded tearstraps spaced 20inches apart under circum-
ferential fuselage frames. These bonded tearstraps en·
hanced the crack arrest capability demonstrated in many
guiDotine tests of pressurized fuselage sections. The cold
bonding process originally used for the tearstraps was
replaced by hot bonding in t 970 to improve corrosion
resistance.

The 727 full scale fatigue test, designed to frnd potential

fatigue crack areas, led to some modification recommen- Figure 8. Stringer clips were introduced
dations. One example is the pressure induced bending in on the Model 727.
the free frame and stringer flanges. The addition of
channel clips between stringer and frame reduced deflec-
tions and prevented fatigue cracking. These channel
clips have become a standard design feature in fuselage
structures. (Figure 8.)

The main landing gear trunnion beam design concept was

introduced on the 727 to provide a better gear load
redistribution to the rear spar. (Figure 9.) This design
concept has become a main Stay for subsequent Boeing jet
transports.

Model 737

When a market developed for an airplane smaUer than the

727, Boeing developed a unique design concept in 1964
that which at the time offered substantial advantages based
on a long thin naceUe which would create less drag than
the traditional forward lower podded position. Reliability
and maintainability were of primary importance in the 737 Figure 9. The trunnion support beam
market, so a great deal of attention was devoted to these was introduced on the Model 727.
areas. One result is the 737's lack ofmain gear doors except
for those covering the strut in the retracted gear position.
The recently certified 737-300 is an efficient derivative
making use of many of the structural arrangements and
materials proven by more than 1,200 Model 737 airplanes
delivered to date. (Figure 10.)

As the direct descendant of tbe 707 and 727, the 737

maintained the design continuity of the Boeing line of jet
transports. Its structure combines the best features of its
predecessors with the latest technology in materials,
processes and manufacturing methcx:ls. The 727 design
team was assigned, intact, to the 737 in order to apply its
experience to the goal of producing an airplane with an
economic service life of more than 75,000 flights.
Whenever practical, 737 design was identical or very
similar to 727 design, so many structural arrangement
designs had been tested and verified by service experience.
New tests were conducted for significantly different detail
designs. (continued on page 13)
Figure 10. Model 737 deliveries began in 1967.

U - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A I R U N E R I J A N - M A R 1986
-~~~~~-------~~~-~---_._-- - ---------------------------

Fuel Conservation AIRuNER

Ope~ions NEWSLETTER No. 21 January·March 1986

Our operational subject is improved The primary consideration in altitude

climb, also known as overspeed. This selection is to cruise at an altitude, or
CONTENTS procedure, which increases the series of altitudes, that results in the
normal takeoff speeds such thai minimum fuel bum for the lotal
Introduction .•..•..••.• •. 1
surplus runway length is utilized to cruise distance traveled, that is, to
Optimum Cruise Altitude .. I
increase (or improve) takeoff climb achieve the best overall fuel mileage.
Theory and Use of
limited weight, has been certified on To ny such a profile it is necessary
Improved Climb •..••..•. 3
all Boeing models although the to know the optimum altitude as a
predominant application has been to function of weight for the desired
the 737 and early 747 models. Since speed schedule. Optimum altitude
INTRODUCTION several operators have recently been information for a comprehensive
exposed to improved climb for the range of weights and speed schedules
e have now completed five first time on the 737·300, we feel that is published in all Boeing Operations

W years of publication of our

Newsletter. During that
time several new or modified Boeing
it would be beneficial to discuss this
topic now.
Manuals and is obtained by plotting
fuel mileage (which is True Air Speed
(TAS) divided by total fuel now)
model airplanes have been put into OPTIMUM CRUISE ALTITUDE versus pressure altitude for a given
evice, such as the 757. 767, 737·300 weight and cruise speed schedule. It
and the 747 Stretched Upper Deck. We are frequently asked to clarify our should be noted that although fuel
All of these models offer considerable definition of optimum cruise altitude. mileage is dependent on true airspeed
improvements in fuel economy. There are various misconceptions of optimum altitude is relatively insensi-
Equally significant is the stabilization exactly what we mean by optimum tive to the speed schedule selected.
in fuel prices over the past five years. altitude. Examples heard over the
Forecasts predicted that fuel could be years include the following: We define OPTIMUM ALTITUDE
costing about $2.00 US Dollars per as follows:
gallon today, whereas, in many parts • Maximum cruise thrust limits the pre$5ure altitude at a given
of the world the fuel price is still • Ug maneuver margin (or some weight and cruise speed sched-
around the $1.00 US Dollar per gallon other value) ule at which maximum fuel
level that existed when our first • Minimum fuel now mileage, that is, the maximum
Newsletter was published. • Step climb altitude value af nautical air miles per
pound (or kilogram) of fuel
Although we sense a reduction of We therefore believe it would be
consumed. is achieved.
interest in the need for fuel economy, useful to discuss cruise altitude
Boeing intends to continue its selection and review the definition of Figure I shows how fuel mileage
efforts in the Newsletter. As stated optimum altitude in an effort to dispel varies with altitude for typical
previously, il has become difficult to some of the common misconceptions
find new topics or items that are of mentioned above.
widespread interest, and operator
suggested topics are always Cruise altitude selection, both during
welcomed. night planning/dispatch and in-
night, can have significant impact on
In this issue we are covering two fuel used. There are several con-
subjects that operators frequently ask straints on cruise altitude selection
us about. The topic that has a bearing that are not related 10 airplane
on fuel conservation is optimum capabilities, such as ATC require-
cruise altitude. Although this ments, night level assignments;
concerns some relatively fundamental these will not be addressed in this
performance concepts, we believe article. However, we will confine our
many operators appreciate coverage discussion to the data presented in the Figure 1. Typical Fuel Mileage
of this type of basic review. Boeing Operations Manual. Variation With Altitude

Fuel Conservation and Operations Newsletter 1

weights at a given speed schedule Figure 3 iIIuSErates this for a typical A further item that has an effect on
(either constant Mach or variable model. Maneuver margin to initial altitude selection is wind component.
Mach such as Long Range Cruise). It buffet should also be checked. For Trip fuel is really dependent on
can be seen that cruising above or most Boeing models there is about a ground distance traveled, rather than
below the optimum altitude will J.5g maneuver capability at optimum air distance, and is therefore a
reduce the fuel mileage below the altitude. In the United States and function of the headwind or tailwind
maximum value. Table I shows the most other countries there are no component. In effect, fuel mileage is
approximate penalties for cruising off regulatory values for cruise maneuver expressed as ground speed divided by
optimum altitude for I!Itypical model. margin. Many operators, however. fuel now. Provided the wind is
use some minimum value, such as constant with altitude the optimum
1.3g, for initial altitude selection or altitude is the same as for the
COIIsrAJIT for step climb initiation. Figure 3 zero wind case. If wind is varying

2llOlI n MOVt , ""., also shows how the cruise maneuver

margin varies with altitude.
with altitude, however, the optimum
altitude will change. Wind/altitude
•,, ,•
......,
Of'TlMUM ALmuD£
2llOlI rr auow
• u•
trade information is provided in all
Boeing Operations Manuals, and its
use depends on knowledge of wind at
" • altitude.
Table 1. Penalties For Cruising Off
Optimum Altitude In conclusion, we would like to
address some of the common miscon-
It can also be seen in Figure I that the ceptions of the definition of optimum
optimum ahitude increases as fuel altitude mentioned earlier. These are
bums off. A good roleollhumb is that not entirely erroneous, and it is easy
optimum altitude increases by about to see how these definitions arose.
1000 feet per hour (500 nautical
miles). Considering the usual 4000 Figure 3. Typical Altitude • Optimum altitude is not equal
foot vertical separation between night Selection Data to the thrust limited altitude,
levels, initial cruise altitude should although maximum cruise thrust
be selected 1000 to 2000 feet above As an interest item, since the relation- limits must be considered in initial
optimum with step climbs made to ship of Thrust Limit and Maneuver altitude selection. Some operators
keep the airplane close to optimum Margin altitudes vary with weight have used thrust limit altitude for
altitude. A typical flight profile is similar to Optimum Altitude (see initial cruise, although this
illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 3 where all lines are relatively frequently results in too high
parallel) it is possible to express all of an altitude relative to optimum.
the altitude selection data shown in Others use a combination of
Figure 3 in terms of altitude relative optimum and thrust limit.
looptimum, instead of actual altitude,
that is Optimum Altitude +2000 feet, • Optimum altitude is not equal
Optimum Altitude -30Cl0 feet, etc. to I.5g maneuver capability.
This greatly simplifies the data Maneuver margins should always
presentation since maneuver margin be considered. and it so happens
is constant and thrust limit is almost that optimum altitude is about
constant when expressed in this man- 1.5g margin; however, this is not
ner. Figure 4 illustrates this point. the way optimum altitude is
defined.

• Optimum altitude is not where

minimum fuel flow is achieved.
Fuel mileage is a function of only Since fuel mileage equals True
speed and fuel now and consequently Air Speed divided by fuel now,
is not directly related to the maximum fuel mileage would
airplane'S thrust capabilities or coincide with minimum fuel flow
maneuver margin. However, ahitude only if TAS is constant for all
capability at Maximum Cruise Thrust altitudes, which is not so.
limits must be checked. On most However, when operating at
Boeing models the available tbrust is optimum altitude fuel now is close
more than adequate to cruise above Figure 4. Performance Capabilities to the minimum value.
optimum altitude even on a hOI day. Relative to Optimum Altitude

2 Fuel Conservation and Operations Newsletter

 ----------------

• Optimum altitude is not the cases at high altitude airports where a close in obstacle. For close in
step climb initiation point. The absolute maximum performance is obstacles, the trade of excess field
step climb decision is frequently required. length is more useful in gaining
expressed relative to optimum takeoff weight than is use of the
altilUde. However, the converse is The best runway performance is improved climb technique of trading
not true. achieved with the lowest possible field length for speed and gradient
takeoff speed schedule consistent incr~. Figure 6 iUustrat~ a case
The foregoing discussion is of course with certification regulations. This where tbe NORMAL V2 night path
only applicable 10 medium or long philosophy results in V2 speeds which will clear OBSTACLE I but not
range flights where the cruise time are invariably somewhat below the OBSTACLE 2. It can be seen from
is long enough to permit altitude speed required for optimum climb the figure that the use of imprOVed
optimization. For short trips, up to gradient; Figure 5 illustrates this climb reverses the situation in
approlliimately 300 - 350 nautical point. Note that l2Vs airplanes are that OBSTACLE 2 is cleared but
miles, the bulk of the flight is taken the farthest away from optimum not I. The analysis involved with
up by climb plus descent. In this case climb gradient. The Improved Climb determination of obstacle clearance
some arbritrary cruise time or dis- procedure is a technique used to capability when using imprOVed climb
tance is defined which results in the increase the normal V2 speeds is complex and is best handled by the
recommended short trip altitude as towards the optimum climb gradient use of computerized takeoff analyses
shown in the Boeing Operations speed. The resulting gradient program.
Manual. improvement at a given gross weight
can then be traded for higher gross
THEORY AND USE OF weight at the same gradient as that
IMPROVED CLIMB which is required by regulations for
the second segment gross gradient
Periodically, we receive questions (2.4% / 2.7% / 3.0% for 21 3 / 4
about the benefits and theories behind engine airplanes).
the use of improved climb perform-
ance. In this article we will present a
short synopsis on what Improved
Climb is and how it is used to enhance
performance. Since the objective of
this discussion is not to make an Figure 6. Obstacle Clearance
aeronautical engineer out of the Considerations
reader, we will not cover the usage
of the Airplane Flight Manual or The Use of [mproved Climb
the Boeing Operations Manual
chans. Reference may be made to the Having discussed the theory behind
appropriate Airplane Flight Manual improved climb, let us now brieny
and Boeing Operations Manual for Figure S. Generalized Climb investigate the gains to be achieved.
more detailed discussions on Gradient vs Takeoff Speed Figure 7 shows gross weight allowable
Improved Climb calculations. as a function of available (corrected)
The use of an increased V2 speed field length for a typical 747 airplane
Discussion of the Theory to improve climb limited weights at given conditions of airport pressure
requires that the associated VI and
The use of Improved Climb proce- VR speeds be increased in order that
dures to enhance takeoff performance the V2 speed for improved climb can
is not new. The procedures are be reached by 35 feet. Obviously the
certified for all Boeing Model higher speeds for takeoff require that
airplanes except the 747SP and are additional field length be available for
especially effective for use with twin the benefits of imprOVed climb to be
engine jels. The most worthwhile realized.
benefits from the use of Improved
Climb procedures relate to the 737 The improved climb technique can
and 747 airplanes. The advantages of be used in some cases to enhance
using lmproved Climb procedur~ for obstacle clearance capability. Gener·
727 airplanes are fairly minimal. ally, imprOVed climb may provide
Improved Climb procedures for ihe performance gains only for the distant
707 airplanes are used in special obstacle case and not for the case of Figure 7. 747 lmproved Oimb
Benefit

Fuel Conservation and Operations Newsletter 3

altitude and OulSide AirTemperalure
(OAl). It can be seen from the figure
thai flaps 20 ..., ilI yield higher ....·eights
from shon fields up to lhe point where
the second segment climb Iimil is
reached. At this poinl optimizing
climb performance ""ould require the
selection of the next Io"'er nap setting
(flaps 10) which, in the sample case
shown, entails an immediale field
length penalty of about 900 feel. The
use of improved climb delays the
point at which a lower flap setting is
required and the gains in takeoff
weight indicated by the shaded areas
can be realized. Figure 8 illustrates

Figure 9. 131·200ADV Sample Airport Analysis

proVISion for an inlermediate nap (less than a 1% thrust reduction)

setting, there is no other way 10 when operating with improved climb
Figure 8. lmpro-.ed Climb S~
achieve this performance increase and procedures. Obviously, when using
lncrease 141 Example
the benefits can be significant. improved climb procedures in combi-
nation with reduced takeoff thrust,
As this point il is appropriate to takeoff speeds will be higher than
Ihe degree ofimproved speed required discuss briefly the use of reduced would be required wilhoul reduced
(in one percent increments) to achieve thrust in conjunction with improved thrust. Operators must carefully con·
weight gains for a typical 141 air- climb procedures. Since the Airplane sider for themselves the questions
plane. The figure shows that for a Flight Manual (AFM) does not of rejected takeoff proleclion and
runway length of 10,500 feet, the prohibit the use of reduced takeoff possible increases in tire/brake costs
improved climb procedure provides a thrust with improved climb proce- when evaluating this course of action.
weight gain of approximately 4,000 dures there is no reason why this
kilograms in the maximum allowable would not be considered a valid
brake release weight for a speed operational possibility. The AFM
increase of approximately Ihree contains performance data to deter-
percent_ Figure 9 is an example of mine the assumed lemperature and
a computerized airpor~ analysis hence the takeoff thrust (EPR or N I) BOEING FUEL CONSERVATION
illustrating tbe weight gain and reduction allowed for the improved AND OPERATIONS l'I.'EWSLETTER
speed increase required when using climb situation. However, our feeling
improved climb techOlqllCS WIth a is that the operator should consider Flight Operations Engineering
Flight Technical Section
sample 137·200 advanced airplane. the price to be paid in the terms Bodna Commercial Airp1aDe Compauy
From the figure it can be seen that for field length which must be given up P.O. Bo. 3707, Seattle WA 9812.4
a 44 degree Celsius, zero wind day, a (0 achieve the maximum thrust Telepbont (2(l6) 655-3185
2,900 kilogram weight increase may reduction. A rough estimate for the
be obtained with an increase of IS. 131-200 Advanced model indicates
17, 16 knots for VI. VR and V2 that approximately 250 feet of runway
respectively. Aside for making is required for each .01 EPR reduction

• Fuel Conservation and Operations Newsletter

 The 737'5 fail-safety and fatigue perfonnanee were further
improved by the use of new bonded skin doublers that
perfonn the same function as the tear-stopper straps used
on the 707 and 727. Nonstructural access door cut-Qut$
that were designed with reduced stress ooncentrations and
machined pads rather than riveted-on doublers were used
for similar reasons. The wing/fuselage intersection was a
design departure from previous swept wing jet transpons
that was initiated to save weight and became feasible
because ofreduced wing sweep and greater wing thickness.
Refined analyses methods made it possible to eliminate the
bottle pins used on models 107 and 727. This new design
concept provided fail-safety througb attachment redun·
dancy of body bulkheads to the wing-spar structure.
(Figure 11.)
Figure 11. Attachment redundance in lieu o( bottle pins
The trunnion support gear beam concept introduced on
(or wing·body joints was Introduced on the Model 737.
the 721 was further improved on the 737. A dual load path
construction with bonded back-to-back half beams was
introduced to improve damage tolerance cbaracteristics.
This concept has continued to be used for later Boeing
models.

The traditional 707 built-up stabilizer center-section box

structure with its many fasteners and joints, was replaced
on the 731 with a truss-type construction. The star-shaped
pattern of forged beams in the center section increased
structural efficiency, saved weight and improved inspect-
ability. (Figure 12.) Fail-safe load capability was demon-
strated by tests with the top chord completely cut at the
center line.

Model 747

The airline traffic was growing at over 15% per year by

the mid 1960's. Airport and airway congestion became
Figure 12. On tbe Model 137, the borizontaJ stabilizer glutted for the then current air traffic control system. This
truss design replaced tbe center-section box. led to introduction of an airplane combining higher
technology with lower seat mile cost. A new factory had
to be built simultaneous with design and manufacturing
activities between the go-ahead in 1966 and the first
delivery in 1969. It was perhaps one of the most ambitious.
privately funded ventures in world history.

The 747 marked the advent of the application of major

finite element analysis methods to large structures by
subdivision into a fine grid for whicb stresses and strains
could be calculated with the emerging high power
computers. This provided an excellent opponunity to
analyze major portions of complex structures to obtain
rermed strength margins. These improved analysis capa-
bilities, with their test·verified results, spurred develop-
ment of many new design concepts. They also allowed
optimal use of inherent material strength characteristics.
Wing·body interseclions and aero-elastic tailoring of
nacelle structure to reduce flutler are some examples of
Figure 13. Major finite element analysis methods (or complex analyses that often established the state-of-the-
large structures was introdu«d 011 the Model 747. art. (Figure 13.)

AIRLINER/JAN.MAR 19~ ---------------------------13

 Fatigue and fail-safe design concepts were refined on the
747 with more formalized fatigue analyses and extensive
full-scale fatigue test followed by fail-safe testing of some
major componeniS on the same test article. The upper
surface material was changed from 1178 to 7075 to
enhance fatigue and fail-safe characteristics. The 747
introduced two-cell wing box construction with multi-
stringer attachments for both fin and horizontal stabilizer
surfaces which improved fail-safe characteristics substan-
tially. High interference fastener systems were also intra--
duced with extensive use of automated Gemcor riveting
machines.

The 747 introduced the first major composite usage on

rudders and elevators, each of which were also divided into
two separate units with individual actuator controls. The Figure 14. Structural fuse designs permit landing gear
747 was also the first to make extensive use of fiberglass. to break away in a manner that will reduce the possibility
A noteworthy example is the variable-carnber leading edge of fuel tank rupture.
naps, with associated challenging structural design con-
siderations. The 147 pioneered fail-safe main landing gears
by employing independent wing and body truck gears.
Welds were eliminated in landing gear structure and
275 ksi heat treal steels were introduced.

Boeing has pioneered many design features to provide

crashworthiness through structural fusing. All concen-
trated load points on the wing torque box are designed to
prevent failure of integral fuel tanks in the event of a
survivable crash landing. The shear bolts attaching the
nacelle struts to the wing are designed as structural fuses
to provide safe separation of the nacelle under extreme
loading conditions. Similarly, abnonnally high drag loads
on the gear will cause structural fuses to fail before rupture
of the wing fuel tank wall structure. (Figure 14.)

Many derivatives, both passengerand freighter versions,

have joined the 600-member 147 family in international
service today. An indication of the program's complexity Figure 15. New materials permitted new structural
is that, at times, the 747 production line contained wings design concepts in the Model 757 and 767 airplanes.
of eight different strengths simultaneously destined for
different derivatives. The next generation 747-400 with
stretched upper fuselage de<:k will incorporate advanced ImprOVed aluminum alloys were incorporated to achieve
aluminum alloys for the wing and will have a 7000 mile increased fatigue performance and fracture toughness and
range. reduced crack growth rates. Increased static strength and
corrosion resistance were equally important accomplish-
Models 757n67 ments. Exploiting the improved me<:hanical properties of
advanced aluminum alloys saved 1,100 pounds of 767
The fundamental reasons for launching of the new 757 and structural weight and 700 pounds of757 structural weight.
767 Boeing jet liners were fuel economy, noise reduction Wing fastener hole cold expansion processes were intra--
and incorporation of te<:hnology developed over the duced for improved durability of major skin splices.
preceding 10 to 15 years. The twin-aisle 767, launched in Advanced skin rivets were used throughout the light gage
1978, had the wing designed with special emphasis on fuel fuselage and empennage structure to allow an increase in
efficiency to suit specific needs of future derivatives. The operating stresses in sheet gages where improved alloys
757 was developed the same year, succeeding the 727 with were not available. Fit-up stresses were substantially
many structural arrangement similarities. It had a totally reduced by increased use of Computer Aided Design and
new wing with less wing sweep than the 767, a similar Manufacturing, CAD/CAM, te<:hnology.
aspect ratio, and 650/0 of the 767 wing area. The 761
entered sel"Vice in mid-1982, and the 757 followed in early During the early 1970's, it became apparent that increased
1983. (Figure 15.) demands would be put on the fatigue performance of

14 AIRLIl'.'ERlJAN-MAR 1986
 Boeing's Design for Durability manuals wert made ready
for application to new airplane design.

The 767 production design had an international nair

which was new to Boeing: a ponion of the basic airframe
design was initially released in Italy and Japan. The
durability manuals ensured consistent detail design quality
and ensured that design objectives were being met
throughout the drawing release phase on three continents
at the same time.

The durability methods used during development testing

and interpretation of test data provided the confidence to
proceed into the production design phases of the 7S7n67
airplanes at operating stress levels higher than those used
Figure 16. The Boeing Company initiated the on previous models. The proof of the total design effort.
Structures Durability Program in 1971. however, remained to be demonstrated by full-scale
airframe fatigue tests which are used by Boeing to locate
areas that might exhibit cracking early in service life.
These tests provide opportunities to develop necessary
modifications and inspection/repair procedures. Full-
scale fatigue testing is conducted for economic reasons and
is not intended to demonstrate safe·life limits of structures
cenified as damage tolerant.

Both the 7S7 and the 767 airframe structures were

subjected to compn=hensive flight-by-flight fatigue tests.
A one-hour flight was selected as a conservative represen-
tation of a majority of operators nying routes similar to
those flown by the medium-range 727 family. The 7S7 and
767 were fatigue tested as complete airframes, except for
some major components tested separately to accelerate the
acquisition of test data cost effectively.

The test spectrum consisted of five different flight profiles

Figure 17. Major fatigue tests simulating two airframe applied randomly within a block of S,OOO flights that was
lives noo,ooo night cycles) substantiated the structural repeated ten times to represent twenty years of service.
designs of the Model 757 and 767 airplanes. Each ground.air.ground flight included ground handling.
taxi, takeoff, climb, cabin pressurization. and landing with
thrust reversing and braking.

transport airplanes to minimize structural maintenance Major airframe inspections were conducted at intervals
costs. Customers made certain Boeing was aware of their equivalent to approximately 10,000 flights. Visual inspec-
n=pair and maintenance: costs and the additional invest- tions of the entire airframe, like those used by airlines,
ment required 10 upgrade structun= to meet extended life were performed. Inspection locations and procedures
requirements. In 1971, The Boeing Company initiated the followed the maintenance planning data supplied for
Structures Durability Program. (Figure 16.) The program certification. After completion of SO,<XX> flights, a major
was a major step in exptrience n=tcntion and the formula- inspection was conducted with loading fixtures and major
tion of an engmeering approach to fatigue detail design. reaction straps removed. After completion of 100,<XX>
A summary of discrete types of fatigue distress and flights, a final teardown inspection was conducted. The
structural areas prone to repetitive problems was fatigue test results of both tbe 7S7 and 767 major airplane
generated. tests were exceptional as proven by the rapid completion
of two lifetimes (100,000 flights) of testing in record
The knowledge gained provided a comprehensive under- calendar time (Figure 17), without any down-time caused
standing of detail design quality and became the founda- by structural fatigue cracking. For both the 7S7 and 767,
tion for building an improved fatigue design methodology. more than ten years of repeated load experience was
Fleet comparisons, additional testing and teardowns of accumulated on each model before its first revenue flight.
high time service airplanes added confidence in these new The Structures Durability Program goal of reducing up
methods. Fi"'e years after tbe iDCq)lion of this program, to 8S0/0 of detail design problem areas was far exceeded.

AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 5
 required spans a five-to six-year cycle to achieve fuJI
implementation of corrosion prevention measures.

Original fail-safe design criteria required limit·load

strength for a fatigue failure or obvious panial failure
of single principal element. The capability to analyze
damaged structure has imprOVed in recent years through
the application of advanced fracture mechanics. Federal
regulations cited in FAR 25 were updated in 1978 to
reflect such state-of-the-art developments to require con-
sideration of damage growth at multiple sites in damage
Figure 18. Development phasing or corrosion prevention. tolerance assessments. These new criteria also require
attention to structural damage characteristics when
developing an inspection program. This has accelerated
development of better ways to ensure damage tolerance
of new and aging jet transports by timely detection of
unexpected fatigue, environmental deterioration, or
accidental damage.

Boeing has focused major efforts on establishing quantita-

tive damage detection evaluation methods tbat pennit
rational comparative analyses. The Boeing Damage
Tolerance Rating (DTR) system (Figure 19) provides
additional flexibility for 757 and 767 operators to incor·
porate supplemental fatigue damage inspections of
selected high flIight candidate aircraft. Required damage
detection reliability can be acbieved by modifying and/or
complementing the type, level, and frequency of inspec-
tions. The Boeing DTR system provides an efficiency
measurement of inspection activities and permits cost-
Figure 19. Additional maintenance flexibility is built efficient maintenance planning without compromising
into tbe Boeing Damage Tolerance Rating (DTR) system. safety. The same system has also been used to develop
supplemental structural inspection programs for selected
727/737/747 candidate airplanes.

From the beginning, the 767 design was intended to

expand to a family of airplanes, each with performance
The 757/767 have the best corrosion control system characteristics to suit specific needs. Recent changes of
available. Boeing used the experience of its 4()(X).airplane guidelines for extended range operation of twin.-engine
fleet to incorporate over 140 corrosion resistance improve- airliners spurred the introduction of 767-2ooER with a
ments developed for previous models. Aluminum material range of 5300 miles. The 767-300 will enter service in 1986
tempers were selected to provide bigh resistance to stress with approximately 20% increased seating capacity.
corrosion and galvanic corrosion (7079 aluminum was not Similarly, me 757 family of airplanes is likely to expand
used). Graphite composites were isolated to inhibit gal- with the increased demand in the over-night package
vanic actions. No alloy steel fasteners were used in exterior freight market place.
skins. High-durability adhesive banding with phosphoric-
acid anodize surface preparation and corrosion-inhibiting Summary
adhesive primer were introduced to eliminate disbanding.
This bonding durability has been proven by over IS years During the past 30 years, significant advances bave been
of research and nine years of in-service airline experience. made in the development of efficient materials and
Fuselage drainage was also improved by new, flexible structures for commercial jet transport applications.
leveling compound filler materials that eliminate wet Considerable resources bave been required to capitalize
pockets. Faying surface seal was used on all wing details on experience by developing disciplined design, analysis
that attach to exterior surfaces of the skin. One-piece and manufacturing techniques evidenced by today's safe,
module construction with a wateHight base was used for and fuel.-efficient airplanes. Tbis development of materials
preventing corrosion in lavatories. and structures is e:o;pected to continue in the years to come,
but cost considerations will playa more important role
The development phasing of many of these corrosion than ever before. As new materials and structural design
protection improvements depends on timely inspection concepts are developed for the ne:o;t generation of jet
reporting to identify probJems and to take necessary transports, considerable emphasis will be placed on
design improvement steps. (Figure IS.) The time typically manufacturing costs and cost of ownership.

16 AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986
 • • •
• • •
• • •
• • • •
• • •
-----
A prototype semi....utom.ted eddy current inspectioo instrument.

Non uctive
Inspections
NONDESTRUcnVE INSPECflON OF INSERVICE BOEING AIRPLANES - Part 1

By
C F. Raalz NDT and Airplane Design
R~rch and Developm~nt Quality Om/rol
One of the reasons for the growth of NOT in airplane
his is the second of throe articles on Boeing's maintenance is related to airplane design. Boeing's

T support to tbe nondestructive inspection of

in-service airplaMS. The first article described
a nondestructive test as a method to check the soundness
commercial jet lraI1Sports are designed with damage
tolerant primary structure consisting of multiple members
and multiple load paths such that structural damage
of a material or part without impairing or desltOying the would be discovered by either nonnal or special directed
serviceability of the part. The nondestructhoe tests most inspections before structural strength falls below specified
frequently used in airplane structural inspection are liquid levels. Examples of damage tolerant design are given in
penetrant, magnetic panicle, radiographic, ultrasonic and Figure I. The integrity of damage tolerant structure is in
eddy current. A description of each of these tests is given part maintained throughout the economic life of an
in the lirst article of this series. This article looks at tlle airplane through a program of regular maintenance and
growth in nondestructive testing (NOn technology and inspection including nondestructive inspections of hidden
its application to in-service airplane inspection. details.

AIRLINER/JAN.MAR 1'186 17
 Figure 1. Damage tolerance design examples typically used in (A) fuselage
crown skin construction and (8) main landing gear beams.

NDT and Airplane Maintenance Operators looked to Boeing to provide approved

Planning Data Documents inspection for adaptable to NDT items. This led to the
release in September of 1961 of Boeing's first general
Boeing supports the integrity orin-service damage tolerant nondestructive test document in support of in-service
structure through Maintenance Planning Data documents airplane inspection. The statement of commitment 10
(MPO) for each airplane model. These documents are airplane nondestructive inspection included in the
prepared in coordination with Boeing airplane operators introduction to this first NOT document still stands finn
and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The today, twenty-five years later, as a watchword of Boeing's
MPO specifies maintenance and inspection locations, continued commitment to in-service airplane NOT: The
times and intervals. Historically, visual inspection has Boeing Company is pursuing an aggressive program to
been the baseline for aircraft structural inspection. advance the technology of nondestructive testing for the
However, for tooay's large jet airplane with its complex further benefit of our operators.
structure the once common practice of opening up and
dissassembly of structure for visual inspection is An example of an early adaptable to NDT inspection is
prohibitively costly in both labor and airplane out-of- the X-ray ofaluminum support structure for the fiber glass
service time. In the late 1950's airline operators began to glove on 720 airplanes. The glove is secondary structure
look for new ways to manage inspection costs for the new on the upper wing surface consisting of fiberglass panels
generation of jet transports and turned to the then supported by aluminum substructure. Its purpose is to
emerging technology of nondestructive testing and its improve wing aerodynamic characteristics and airplane
potential for inspection of hidden structure without performance. It is not critical to airplane safety; however,
opening-up or dissassembly. In support of this objective, breakage during night could pose a ground hazard. To
Boeing reviewed its airplane maintenance planning prevent innight panel loss, a periodic external visual
documents to identify inspections which could be inspection is conducted of the fiberglass panels for
accomplished by a nondestructive test. The outcome of evidence of damage. If there is evidence of damage, an
this review was that a number of707 airplane MPO items examination of the aluminum support structure is
were identified as being adaptable to NDT. With the conducted. Visual examination of the support structure
addition of this statement the airplane operator could requires removal of a large number of fasteners for
employ a nondestructive inspection to meet the fiberglass panel removal. Inherent to fastener removal is
requirment of the original visual inspection. the potential for fastener hole and panel damage. The
alternative adaptable to NDT inspection is an X-ray
The Nondestructive Test Manual conducted through the wing as described in Figure 2.
X-ray permits inspection of the aluminum support
En this early period there was little background on the structure without panel removal and at a considerable
capabilities or limitations of airframe structural NDT reduction in inspection cost and airplane downtime. This
particularly for the newer ultrasonic and eddy current test example is typical of early adaptable to NDT inspections.
methods. Because of this, airplane operators were required These inspections in keeping with the then existing
by their FAA representative to provide proof that a knowledge of airplane structural NOT were usually
proposed nondestructive test met inspection requirements. limited to larger cracks in secondary structure.

18 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986
 Figure 1. X.Ray in5pedion is an alternative to panel Figure 3. The R«hii semi-automated eddy current
remo.... 1 and TisuaJ inSpectioll of support structures. instrument permits rapid inspection of fastener boles.

DeTelopment of Airplane Structural NDT

The promise-of NOT for improved inspection and reduced

inspection time and cost created a continued demand for
its use. During this early period this demand could not
be fully met in pari due 10 the limited capability of NDT
instruments and in part to too little understanding of
nondestructive testing as applied to airplane structure.
Boeing on several occasions developed its own NOT
instruments to meet inspection needs. For example, a
small portable general purpose eddy current inslrumenl
was developed and subsequently manufactured
commercially as the NDT·1 and an instrument developed
for the inspection of metal bond is commercially
manufactured as the Hannonic Bond Tester. In Figure 3
an inspector is using the commercial version of a Boeing
designed semi-automat«l eddy current instrument for the
rapid inspection of fastener holes called a Rechii.

Paralleling the development of improved instruments were

developments to improve crack detection and to expand
airplane structural inspection capability. A number of
improvements resulted from nondestructive inspecdon in Figure 4. The 747 landing gear is shown being
checked in a cyclic load test fixture.

Figure 5. The 757 shown

in this fatigue test rig was
built in the factory using
the same parts and tooling
as the production airplanes.
The structure is then C)'ded
to prove the fatigue life of
the airplane.

AlRUNERlJAN·MAR 19N - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19
 support of Boeing's airplane structural test programs.
Boeing subjects major airplane components such as
landing gear, control surfaces and complete airplane wing
and body to static and cyclic load tests. These tests verify
engineering design and confirm structural performance
objectives. Figure 4 is a 747 landing gear in a cyclic load
test fixture and in Figure 5 a complete 757 airplane is
shown surrounded by a steel framework which supports
hydraulic load cells attached to wing and tail surfaces.
Through this means representative in-service loads are
transmitted to the test structure. Cyclic load tests
compress yea~ of airplane service inlo a few Neeks or
months of testing. To supplement structural test
performance information gathered by sensitive detectors
located throughout the test structure, periodic
nondestructive tests are conducted. Ultrasonic. eddy
current, X-ray, liquid penetrant and magnetic particle
tests are employed depending on structural configuration Figure 6. An eddy current bole probe and
and the condition being evaluated. On completion ofcyclic
calibration standard.
load testing the test structure is dissassembled and detailed
visual and nondestructive inspections 3re performed for
evidence of material degradation. configuration changes and inspection process
improvements seem minor; however, their cumulative
Nondestructive inspections in support of engineering effect is significant. Today this probe and calibration
proof of design tests have produced significant standard when used with a procedure optimizing hole
contributions to the inspection of airplane structure. These inspection effectively finds cracks of .030 inch length. The
improvements have subsequently been applied to the current configuration of a hand held eddy current fastener
inspections of in-service airplanes. An example of such hole probe and its calibration standard are as shown in
improvement is the eddy current inspection of fastener Figure 6.
holes after fastener removal. During cyclic load tests the
early detection of cracks permits test structure Manual eddy current fastener hole inspection for .030 inch
performance projections and adjustment to test cracks is a very tedious process. An eddy current probe
conditions. Liquid penetrant has long been employed as sensitive to small cracks inspects only a small section of
a detector of small surface cracks. However, in the case hole with each scan. Complete inspection of a hole made
of fastener holes, access Hmitations and penetrant up of two or three members may require several minutes.
bleed-oul from hole interfaces can obscure the detection In addition, a high level of inspector skill and allention
of small cracks. Early eddy current hole inspections were is necessary to assure satisfactory results. A reduction in
conducted using a cylindrical probe with a sensing coil hole inspection time with improved crack detection were
mounted at right angles to the side of the cylinder. objectives of a Boeing Quality Control Research and
Inspection is accomplished by inserting the probe into a Development program in the mid-1970's. These objectives
hole and rotating it in a circumferential scan. The coil's were accomplished with the development of an eddy
electromagnetic field induces an eddy current in the hole current fastener hole inspection system and the marketing
wall. A crack in the wall disrupts the eddy current and of its commercial version as shown in Figure 3. This
its electromagnetic field and this disruption is sensed by battery powered semi-automated eddy current system
the probe and recorded by the instrument. The first eddy consists of a rapidly spinning probe which is inserted in
current hole probes with their large coil size and poor a hole much like a drill. The probe's differential coils are
control over probe-to-hole alignment could only detect insensitive to hole interfaces and material differences but
large cracks. Even so their crack detection were better than highly sensitive to small cracks aligned with the hole axes.
that of liquid penetrant. Improvements in probe This system effectively finds .030 inch and smaller hole
configuration, including smaller coils wound on ferrite cracks and does this in a per hole inspection time of
cores to concentrate the magnetic field, collars to control seconds.
probe hole penetration depth and alignment, and shaping
and slotting of the probe end to control hole wall contact, NDT and Structural Repairs
substantially improved hole crack detection.
Why the emphasis on the detection of small hole cracks?
Concurrent with probe configuration improvements were It is a question of economics and structural integrity.
improvements in the fastener hole inspection process. A Boeing Airplane Structural Repair Manuals require that
hole calibration standard containing representative cracks holes opened up during repair or modification be inspected
was designed and a cleanup ream was identified to improve for assurance of hole quality, referring to specific airplane
hole surface uniformity. Individually, fastener hole probe model NOT manuals for this inspection. The quality of

2 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986
 holes which have been eddy current inspected for .030 inch SmaU cracks were found in the lower wing splice stringers.
or larger cracks is assured by hole oversizing to remove the longest of which was 0.15 inch. The only way cracks
the .030 inch of potentially defective material from the of this size could be detected was through disassembly and
hole wall. Reassembly is then accomplished by simply detailed visual and surface eddy current inspection. This
using an over size fastener. If eddy current inspection were small crack size did not affect structural strength but did
not available a more extensive and expensive repair would raise questions of extent of lower wing splice-stringer
be necessary. cracking in older 701 airplanes and of crack growth rates
and their effect on structural performance. Two programs
NDI And Fleet Surveillance were initiated to answer these questions: Fleet sampling
of older airplanes to determine the elttent of the problem
One of the ways in which Boeing supports in-service fleet and structural tests to provide crack growth and structure
structural integrity is through Fleet Surveillance. strength data.
Surveillance of selected structure is accomplished on
airplanes which have accumulated a high number of Structural tests provided crack growth rates and residual
service hours or flights. Selection can result from an strength related to splice stringer crack length. (Figure 1.)
analysis of data from Boeing's airplane structure static and These tests substantiated the design requirement of limit
fatigue tests; from engineering Stress analyses to identify load strength with the loss of a single structural element
high stress areas; from the service history of the airplane; (splice stringer). fleet sampling to establish the condition
or from the performance of similar structure on other of older airplanes required selection of a suitable
airplane models. Another facet of this structural integrity inspection to detect splice stringer cracks initiating at the
program involves disassembly and detailed inspection of inner row of fastener holes as indicated in Figure 7.
selected airplane structure. On occasion, Boeing has Structural tests had established that detection of 0.5 inch
obtained structure from older airplanes which have been long cracks would provide an adequate crack growth
removed from service. The structure is cut into sections interval for 707/120 airplane fleet control. Accordingly,
and shipped to Boeing where it is disassembled and a suitable inspection for fleet surveillance was one that
carefully examined by visual and nondestructive test for would detect a 0.5 inch long stringer crack could be
such service-connected conditions as fatigue cracks and accomplished within an airline's normal operation and
corrosion. maintenance schedule. This ruled out visual inspection
which required defueling and purging of fuel tanks before
An example of nondestructive test development in support entry and extensive sealant removal, and eddy current
of fleet su.rveillance is the low frequency eddy current fastener hole inspection which would require removal of
inspection of 101 airplane lower wing splice stringers. As hundreds of fasteners. X-ray was a possibility; however,
a part of fleet surveillance Boeing disassembled and X-ray required fuel tank entry for optimum radiographic
performed a detailed inspection of an older 707-300 wing. film placement as well as numerous X-ray eltposures to
assure satisfactory inspection resuJts.

Figure 1. Fatigue test results establishing crack growth rate for a lower wing splice stringer.
The residual strength versus stringer crack length is shown to the right.

AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986 21
 WING CROSS SECTION
SPLICE ""'\. , u _
STRINGER '\

-\J
Cl.J

m<"l11~
CRACK
, SPLICE
CE~TERS

Figure 8. Low frequency ~~/~~~ERWING

~'1~
eddy current spBnwise
splice stringer inspection. INSTRUNENT

~
,:~w,,,,,,,
, SPLICE GAP

- - , EOOV CURRENT
PROBE

The splice stringer inspection was solved with a low for repair can be set within the eXlstmg maintenance
frequency eddy current inspection. This was the first schedule while maintaining fleet integrity. An example of
application of low frequency eddy current for airplane a Service Bulletin employing nondestructive inspe<:tion is
structural inspection. Up to this time eddy current 707/720 Service Bulletin 3226, Wing LQwer Skin Splice
inspection of airplane structure was limited to the Stringer Inspection. This Service Bulletin was the result
detection of surface cracks. The unique feature of low of the previously described dissassembly and inspe<:tion
frequency eddy current is its ability 10 detect subsurface of an older 707-300 airplane wing. The Service Bulletin
and second layer cracks. For the splice stringer inspection identifies initial and repeat inspe<:tion intervals for lower
tbe eddy current probe is scanned along the wing skin gap wing splice stringer low frequency eddy current
to inspect the splice stringer as indicated in Figure 8. inspe<:tion. Reference is made to the 707/720 Airplane
Disruption of eddy currents induced in the splice stringer Nondestructive Test Manual for a detailed procedure on
by 0.5 inch or longer cracks caused a disruption of the how to perform the low frequency eddy current inspe<:tion
related electro-magnetic field which is detected by the along the lower wing skin splices to detect splice stringer
eddy current probe. cracks as shown in Figure 8.

In cooperation with airplane operators Boeing conducted Nondestructive inspections are now routinely employed
a low frequency eddy current surveillance inspe<:tion of in support of many service bulletins. Its contribution to
lower wing splice-stringers on fifteen high time 707 and this end has been substantial. The ability of nondestructive
eight high time 720airplanes. As a result of this inspe<:tion inspection to inspe<:t hidden structure without time
and of splice-stringer structural tests Service BuUetin 3226 consuming opening up of structure and its ability to
was released calling for low frequency eddy current monitor a potential defect condition to permit selective
inspe<:tion of wing lower surface splice-stringers of older maintenance scheduling of a fleet of airplanes has
707 and 720 airplanes. improved airplane structural inspection coverage while
reducing inspe<:tion costs.
NDI In Support of the Se"ice Bulletin
Summary
Boeing uses service bulletins to notify its airplane
customers of particular problems affecting in-service This article reviewed developments in airplane structural
airplanes. A service bulletin gives a detailed description nondestructive testing technology and provided examples
of the problem and the actions required to correct it. of how Boeing has employed this technology in its
Nondestructive inspe<:tion has come to playa significant maintenance and repair manuals and in service bulletins
role in support of service bulletins. The ability of NOT to support the structural integrity of in-service airplanes.
to detect a hidden crack without structure dissassembly The final article in this series will review the current status
is one of its benefits. Another equally important benefit of NOT for in-service airplane inspe<:tion particularly as
is its ability to monitor structure for evidence of change. related its use in support of the OTR system for the
These advantages are particularly important when it inspection of high time airplanes. Some near future
comes to scheduling of airplanes for maintenance or expe<:tations in airplane structural NOT will also be
repair. By knowing the condition of each airplane, priority presented.

22 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A f f i L I N E R I J A N - M A R 1986
 Some training is conducted in the 757 and 767 Maintenance Simulators.

DIGITAL AVIONICS TRAlN1NG FOR THE FAA

by
R.O. Jollie
Supervisor
Maintenance Training

e are living in an era of dramatic technological Digital technology, ~ on binary switching elements

W advances. While these advances have occured

all around us, within the aviation community
t~ impact can most dramatically be seen in the field of
combined with LSI technology, enabled extremely fast
digital computers capable of many nonunique appli-
cations. Another important reason for the advent ofdigital
avionics. One look in the flight deck of a modem airplane computers is the capability of updating them by changing
is sufficient to demonstrate the changes in airplane design the progrom or software.
due to the application of digital technology.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) plays a
Changes within the field of electronics and the implemen- major role in the aviation industry, in both Ihecommercial
tation of digital systems have betn greatly accelerated and general aviation areas. In order to enhance their
within the past fifteen years. The change from transistors awareness and knowledge of state-of-the-art applications
to microcircuits is exemplified by Large Scale Integrated in digital avionics, the FAA decided to tum to industry
(LSI) circuits technology. Early on-board computers were to meel Iheir Iraining requirements. Following an FAA
analog oriented, which resulted in many sole-purpose Requesl for Proposal and subsequent Boeing bid, the
computers, useable only in a single system. These Customer Services Maintenance Training Organization
computers were based on an analogy type of computation, was awarded a contraci on March I. 1985.10 develop and
where a continuous variable signal such as voltage conduct a series of courses for FAA A vionia Safety
represented a specific element of data such as airspeed. Inspectors.

AIRLINER/JAN-MAR 1JI86 ---------------------------23

 and maintenance rep:>rts, and determination of the
DIGITAL AVIONICS adequacy of the operator's maintenance training
TRAINING COURSE OBJECTIVES programs. Investigation functions include identification
and analysis of trends related to digital avionics service
• ACQUIRE A THOROUGH WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF difficulty rep:>Tts and mechanical interruption summaries,
DIGITAL AVIONICS SYSTEMS INSTALLED, OPERATED investigation of accidents and incidents, and FAR
AND MAINTAINED IN MODERN AIRPLANES
compliance concerning operation and maintenance of
• UNDERSTAND COMPUTER TERMINOLOGY AND
SOFTWARE PROGRAM aircraft systems.
• BE ABLE TO MAKE TIMELY AND EFFECTIVE DECISIONS
REGARDING THE INSTALLATION, OPERATION The course is designed to provide FAA Safety Inspectors
AND MAINTENANCE OF DIGITAL AVIONICS SYSTEMS an in-depth understanding of digital avionics applications
• BE ABLE TO EVALUATE GROUND MAINTENANCE in modem aircraft. Practical training is emphasized
SUPPORT ACTIVITIES SUCH AS AUTOMATIC TEST throughout the course with about 30% of available time
eQUIPMENT lATE) STATIONS AND TO ANALYZE spent in hands-on training activity.
THEIR RELATED PROGRAMS
• BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THE ADEQUACY OF
AIRBORNE BUlLT-IN- TEST [BITE] EQUIPMENT
Each five week course is divided into three phases; digital
fundamentals, airplane systems related subjects, and shop
(dep:>t level) maintenance procedures and analysis. A
variety of methods are used to present the course,
These are the five objectives of the digital including instructor presented material, computer aided
avionics training course. training, simulators, video, automated test equipment, and

SUBJECT COVERAGE
GLASS COCKPIT FAMILIARIZATION
~ FUNDAMENTALS OF DIGITAL COMPUTERS
BASIC AND HIGHER LEVEL COMPUTER LANGUAGES
FAMILIARIZATION
.. AIRPLANE AND COMPUTER INTERFACE CONTROL
DOCUMENTATION
~ ARCHITECTURE OF DEDICATED AIRPLANE
COMPUTERS
~ BUILTIN TEST EQUIPMENT (BITE)
c> AUTOMATIC TEST STATION APPLICATION

An increasing level of practical hands-on Seven major subjects are covered in the
training is offered during the five-week course. digital avionics training course.

FAA Safety Inspectors must possess a broad technical microprocessor training stations. Instructor presentations
background and be knowledgeable in a variety of aviation are supplemented with multimedia and computer driven
disciplines. Their primary duties may be classified into simulation, which provides a dynamic learning environ·
three major functions: certification, surveillance, and ment, designed to maximize student involvement with
investigation. Certification responsibilities include hands-on practice and application.
evaluation of proposed changes to digital avionics
maintenance programs, analysis of automated test The first two weeks of the course comprise phase one,
equipment, evaluation of built·in.test-equipment (BITE), which includes glass cockpit concepts, types of computers,
and evaluation of engineering changes. Surveillance and computer systems, memory devices, number systems,
involves maintenance supp:>Tt activities such as decisions logic review, terminology, and mircocircuits. Special
regarding operation and maintenance of digital avionics emphasis is placed on electrostatic discharge sensitive
systems, analysis ofcorrective actions associated with pilot (ESDS) procedures. This subject is stressed throughout

2 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AIRLINER/JAN-MAR 1986
 The hands-on training stations are located
adjacent to the academic training area.

the course, as improper handling of ESDS components For BITE procedures training the 737-300 Flight
may result in degraded operation or failed systems. Other Management System!Avionics Trainer is used.
topics include circuit timing, interface circuits, high level
languages, memory methods, subroutines, interrupts and
microcircuits. control flight, new technology replaces the cables with
electronics circuitry, commonly known as fly-by-wire
A microprocessor training device is used in phase one to control. Future applications will use fly-by-Iight
demonstrate basic computer structure, programmable technology, as fiberoptics is introduced to replace the
memory (PROM) techniques and practice, and machine existing methods of control and communication.
languages program practice. Computer-aided training is
used to give the students practice in understanding higher Fiberoptics, due to its non-conductive characteristics, will
level languages such as BASIC, PASCAL, and FOR- also reduce or eliminate protC(;tion requirements for static
TRAN. Computer-based training is also used to enhance electricity, electromagnetic interference and lightning
instruction on basic computer structure and interface strikes. Limited application of fiberoptics is anticipated in
circuits. 1990-generation airplanes.

Phase two, the third and fourth weeks of the course,

includes such topics as airplane computers, circuit The future will bring numerous other advances in technol·
specifications, computer architecture, flowchart analysis, ogy. The concept of the glass cockpit presently used on
configuration control and interface signal management, many commercial and general aviation airplanes will be
maintenance manuals, BITE technology, and digital buses enhanced with the introduction of color flat plate display
document analysis. technology. The use of two-way high-speed digital Irans-
mission buses will be expanded. Centralized maintenance
The fifth week, phase three, places special emphasis on monitor systems will be replacing individual system BITE
avionics equipment test languages and associated concepts. Increased automation will facilitate systems
automatic test equipment. capabilities, require less power, reduce weight, provide
more efficient flight management systems, and lead
The Boeing 757 and 767 Maintenance Simulators are used toward global salellite navigation.
to provide systems overviews and demonstrations,
ARINC 429 bus analysis, extensive BITE hands-on As the use of digital systems is expanded, the changing
practice, and typical flight fault reporting and diagnosis. fleet make-up will require training of both FAA inspectors
The simulators provide the students opportunities to use and operator maintenance personnel. The current Digital
black box BITE associated with various systems on the Avionics Course being taught by Boeing is a natural step
airplane. The Maintenance Control Display Panel in the evolution of training, which will be required to keep
(MCDP) is used to provide flight fault analysis and ground up with the introduction of the new technology. This
testing of flight management systems on the 757 and 767. course, or a derivative course, will be made available to
The 737-300 Avionics Trainer is used for BITE procedures airline customers if there is sufficient interest received by
available through the Aight Management Control Display Boeing. Operators interested in obtaining more informa-
Unil (COO). Although these simulators are oriented tion on this training should direct their inquiries to:
toward Boeing airplanes, their application is typical for Director, Customer Training and F1ight Operalions
both commercial and general aviation. Support, P.O. Box 3707, Mail Stop 2T-70, Seattle, WA
98124. As technology leads the aviation communities into
The e\'olulion of technology is changing the concept of the 21st century, Boeing will continue to provide state-of-
flying. Where previous airplane technology used cables to the-art training to support their products.

AIRLINER/JAN·MAR 1986 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 5
BDEING

CUSTOMER SUPPORT
CUSTOMER SUPPORT REPRESENTATIVES
HEADQUARTERS. FIELD SERVICE UNIT
501"le. Washington

Region One Region Five

'CAlLAS 11.E. P.. m.r. REGIONAl DIRECTOR. 'PARIS c ...... Von Thl.lm."". REGION"I. OIRECTOR.
R. ... Iey. 214.353-8242. G Ton..... 2U·1l74·4033. 111 U23-1I1i-'19
La. GIllil.."'. 21.-3al·llIe4 PARIS ICOG) W Edmltll.n. M. Hlmllton. P).1I8_.HMI9
CHICAGO K. An6erwon, R. T.lcon, 3' 2-«11&-3371 PARIS lORY) I. Jim....'. J P. F<.n~, J. Fl..".." R V.rdi._.
DETROIT S..J G......,. PI_88ll-10U
KANSAS CITY R. ft'llow•. D. Gi'~ .... G. ProHln, 815-891-.988 AODIS ABABA H 8 _.... (II11.2:2.22...... U
MEMPHIS P. I ..... n. 90,·791·881, ALGIERS • 78-53·911 '" 99•••1. 2112
MINNEAPOLIS F Joyc., J lien......." II. Plumlee, S. H.w~ .., JOHANNESBURG R, Fri...., II 119711·7.21
8,2·728-2891 LISBON M Jollnaon. (1) 1189923
MONTREAL J. H...t>ut,. S V.I>6e<,-"L II 14-838·2177 MADRID J. OK. III 2018308
NEW YORK 8• .\.cher. T Pl>gli.L G. NO«len. R. Mo.<son. ROME M. T..fn.., 101110111311
7,8-9911-1707 DOUALA S e.tt..2.!i113
NEWARK fl. To".••. 201·981-1581515
ptnSBURGH G. R""n .• ,2·282·7279
SAN ANTONIO L T.bo< RF. 8 ...... Region Six
TORONTO o Ro...ln•• H8·810·230.
TULSA W SUu/.nberll. T M.tt&<ln. 9,8·832·2707 'DUBAI ..... CU'VII. REGIONAL DIRECTOR, (.1 2280111
WINNIPEG C. Slnll •• 20.-9.1·2018 AMMAN H. R CI.ri<. (8) 81133_0
ATHENS I(. Smhh. (1) 98 I 3.09
CAIRO D. K.I~ •• 119"00. UI. 11882
Region Two JEDDAH O. C",..o. G JO"'''&<ln. W. E. Sh.w. R. loi>e.
'SAN FRANCISCO s. R. H.r....n. REGIDN.\l DIRECTOR, .18-877-0181 121885-11011
G R. Nic:oIl. M Cl.tI.ri.llo. R. N.II.I. W BOI'.nbetll.
KARACHI M. HoLaIlPl. W. CIIII. 121\.38730
o Sup.in.~.... 15·878-8818 KUWAIT R. NI....<f<om. 7 18380
ANCHORAGE I.E. Hubbetd. 907·2015-8737
MANAMA T. Mml. 323119.
CALGARY G LoW1'/•• 03·n0-8. HI NEW DELHI o Portman. (1 1)392088
DENVER R. l.non. L Br.nc.... 303-32~928 RIYADJ D. bbcOC~
HONOLULU J . ./oM•. 808·83ll-_21 8 SANAA o 8r.ti•• (2) 782911•••1. II
LAS VEGAS R. I.....nh..... 702·788-0088, .... 380
LOS ANGELES M. e-. J W •• ....,. P. Tro..l.
W. Pon••• D. Root. S hll.l, 2 ,3-870-07.7
MEXICO CITY W 0;. . ..,.151 762·8118 Region Seven
OAKLAND J. Ro.."".• 15·1577_.739
PHOENIX R. Su... 802-829-2781 'SINGAPORE T H 8.11. REGIONM. DIRECTOR, 73_·2097
SEA-TAC II P.n ••....,. 20il-.31·7273 0< .33·3783 E. W. Benhi........ J. Lync .... M. Ander.o". R, Frlcl<.
VANCOUVER, B.C. L Sh.w, ao._27O-U61 11.1·1107_
AUCKLANO J H.rp. L. Hubb.<d.19127113899•••1. .82t
.... _8118
Region Three BRUNEI H.un
CHRISTCHURCH J. Cyg."
"ATLANTA G G._•. IIEGION.\I. DIRECTOR.•0 •._87..r;U7. JAkARTA T 8ray. 12 I) 321008. UL 902
J. H.,.n. I Sn.,d.t. 8. P.nn.nl ••• KUALA LUMPUR J. 8.rt-.13) 78115511..... 2187
o a • .,•.• 0.·708-3120 Ot 78!l-3129 MELBOURNE C. O"lnn. G Smlt"', 131 338·37 I 3. W. Olri< ....
BOGOTA o DelbotlqlHl. (21 a73152_ SYDNEY G V.n de V.n. 8119·7259. H. Mercer
BUENOS AIRES W Smlll>,111820.o1l20 WELLINGTON R Pool.
GREENSBORO R. P.t.....,,,. 919.292-81512, ut. 23_
MIAMI D W.II. S. Got.n~., H. K.....g.r. .\, Colon.
305-1183_17.7
RIO DE JANEIRO E. hu.'.12 II 393-2625.•1ll. 19.
Region Eight
SAO PAULO J. Conn.~, 8.3.__ 29. S GoId.n
'TOKYO J E. M.n. REGION-'1. OIRECTOR. (3)11118-1955
WILSTON·SAlEM V R.bbenl.llllJ.781·U23 TOKYO (ANA) M. 8odl~Y. R RHve•• R, Ruwerd.c31 7.7_11,.5
TOKYO (NCA) M MoI~nberg IN.''t.). lUll) 32·8888
Region Four TOKYO (JALj L. Bon. M. COO~&<l". J Highl.nd......... P."..,.
J E"'.....m. (3)7U-00811
'LONDON M J N....,.rrow. REGIONAL DIRECTOR.lll 1572·6881 F Piw.nIU~y IN.rit.). (UII) 32"'203
w. Shaoro5kl, T Prlm"I..., N. B. Hly".., BANGKOK C. Atm-"ong, (2)lS23-8900. •• t. 11.9
(1) 891·8595 MANILA R 1(.lty. 121 831-0837 0< 832"'22279...1. 2279
AMSTERDAM v McF.ddi", R Sc"'"del. (201.9380_ NAHA J S....n.r. 1988157-9218
BELGRADE H Sc"'".n~ •. E. Shore. R. Comw.11. H SlImn.. SEOUL J Roac:"".12)1l83.8UO. R, 1.0...... 0 Sc"'onberger
/11818186 TAIPEI 1. T.m. F Gutl'wie. 1331 133023. 0< 83.211 I• • ,.t, .119
COPENHAGEN o Mo<ria. t1)1IJ.32.53
DUBLIN R. S....I ..., 111379900 .... !i 121 or II 122
EAST MIDLANDS E. D• .,. (33211112_119•••1. 290 Region Nine
FRANKFURT R. McAlUlt.... 189) 890·231 I
GATWICK J. McC.lllIm. R. HO_I. 1293) 610.1111 'BEIJING T.J Elll•. REGION.\L DIRECTOR
HAMBURG T. U"". C. G. A.nd..-.o". (.0)1109-31130 E. C ng. R A ". K. HoOd.l. W Koperlll<.
LUTON R. Whit"", R. IUMI. 16821 12.11111•• K1. 2737. E nd ". 52.2931.'.1. U.8
8. AllIn. 1682) _ 118.9 or .2.211 •••1. 2911 CHENGOU DC• ....,. M. Colfl"
MUNICH R. G (89) 9211-89811 GANGZHOU C. P".mo<l. J. K...kelberili. 112123.•,.1. 9118
STAVANGER 1l.$1gg t.1.)1I111011 •••1.172 HONG KONG R. H...... C Ri'~"'."'1 (3)789.7280 '" 111121
TEL AVIV S SIOII Il. (3)87 I l1U KUNMlNG T. 8..,.n, R Low..,
ZURICH M Sc"',ndler, (1)1110-30011 0< 8 I 2_71180 XIAMEN E. Ni....i

BOEING AIRLINER
'REGIONAL HEADOUARTERS
: