Part 1

Hello, and welcome to SWENA's training.
In this two-part class, we will look at how the air carrier, the different
organizations,
documents, manuals, and certifications interact with each other to form the
aircraft maintenance program.
In the early days of aviation, maintenance programs were developed by mechanics.
The programs were simple and without analytical basis.
The formation of airlines created the need for new regulations and broader
regulatory involvement in maintenance requirements.
With the entry of large jet airplanes into the commercial market in the 1950s,
the airplane manufacturer became the source of maintenance program development.
The underlying concept was that of hard time, that is, to overhaul or scrap
components after a certain amount of time.
As experience was gained, it became apparent that some components did not require
as much attention as others,
and new methods of maintenance control were developed.
In the 1960s, several large air carriers formed a task force to investigate the
capabilities of preventive maintenance.
The findings of the task force led to a document called Maintenance Steering Group
1, or MSG-1 for short.
A new type of maintenance called on-condition maintenance was developed.
Aircraft components and items removed on an on-condition basis are inspected to
determine their airworthiness.
If certain criteria are not met, the item is replaced and either repaired,
overhauled, or discarded.
Otherwise, it is deemed airworthy and fit to carry on being installed on the
aircraft.
The MSG-1 philosophy was developed further in the following years, and in 1970s
MSG-1 gave way to MSG-2.
It was process oriented and analyzed failure modes from the park level up.
MSG-2 introduced a new maintenance philosophy, condition monitoring.
In this case, no services or inspections are scheduled to determine integrity or
serviceability.
Mechanical performance is monitored and analyzed to prevent premature deterioration
and failure of components or systems
based on the statistical information, but limits and mandatory actions are not
prescribed.
In simple terms, the component is simply repaired or replaced when it fails.
Understandably, this philosophy is best applied to components which are either
backed up by other components
or whose failure does not affect the safe operation of the aircraft.
The main aspect of this maintenance philosophy was its bottom-up approach.
Each component was considered individually, working upwards throughout the system
in which it worked.
The main objective of MSG-2 was to prioritize safety with little regard to
economics.
However, after several years of experience, it was determined that in several cases
costs could be reduced while at the same time maintaining the same safety
standards.
Then, in 1978, United Airlines, commissioned by the Department of Defense,
developed a methodology for designing maintenance programs based on tested and
proven airline practices.
This new methodology was the basis for MSG-3, the current industry standard.
Let's go through the main characteristics of MSG-3.
This methodology has a task-oriented approach to maintenance that analyzes system
failure modes from a system level or top-down.
Several inspection tasks for a particular system or zone of the aircraft are
grouped to form a zonal inspection program,
which can involve tasks such as corrosion inspections and structural sampling.
Maintenance tasks are performed for safety, operational or economic reasons.
They involve both preventive maintenance and failure-finding tasks.
Many items previously considered as condition monitoring are now considered on
condition,
and rather than wait for the part to fail, minimum maintenance activities, such as
lubrication and cleaning,
can extend the life of a component considerably.
As a result, MSG-3 practices result in a 25-30% cost reduction compared to MSG-2.
Revisions to the MSG-3 philosophy have provided added methodology for improving
coverage of all modes of failure,
such as inclusion of the corrosion prevention and control program,
enhanced zonal analysis and lightning or high-intensity radiated fields.
So, to be clear, MSG philosophy divides aircraft components and systems into three
distinct categories depending on when they are maintained.
Hard time refers to scheduled maintenance control, which applies to all maintenance
actions to be accomplished at specific time intervals.
For instance, the FAA requires that altimeters be removed and recalibrated every 24
months.
Also, components like turbine discs and shafts, which have a fatigue life and must
be replaced after a certain number of cycles.
On condition is assigned to components and systems on which a determination of
continued airworthiness can be made by visual inspection,
measurements, tests or other means without disassembly, inspection or overhaul.
This means a maintenance task is carried out on a component or system depending on
our assessment of its condition.
Not time.
The best example of an on-condition component is the engine system, which is
monitored closely during its operation.
By observing parameters such as vibrations, exhaust gas temperature, fuel flow and
oil pressure,
it's possible to determine whether certain components are in need of maintenance.
Condition monitoring is a process for systems, components or appliances that have
neither hard time nor on-condition maintenance as their primary maintenance
process.
It is accomplished by appropriate means available to an operator for finding and
solving problem areas.
The user must control the reliability of systems or equipment based on knowledge
gained by analysis of failures or other indications of deterioration.
Now we'll look at how maintenance is planned for each aircraft.
As we saw with the MSG philosophy, manufacturers continue to work alongside
operators, regulators and associations to continue improving and developing
aircraft maintenance guidelines.
The manufacturer's local civil aviation authority evaluates these proposals and for
each aircraft family emits a maintenance review board report.
It outlines the tasks and conditions that must be met in order to ensure aircraft
airworthiness and is a legal requirement for the aircraft to be considered
airworthy.
The manufacturer then develops a maintenance planning document that specifies which
repetitive tasks have to be performed
and how often to ensure correct maintenance of the aircraft and in compliance with
the MRB report.
Said tasks must also be detailed in their respective task cards, outlining the
correct procedure to follow and data to record in each case.
Each task procedure is documented in the aircraft maintenance manual.
Although specific criteria and time intervals outlined in the MPD must be met, it
is up to the aircraft operator to determine how it will comply.
They will rely on the manufacturer's provided tasks and the MPD to prepare their
own aircraft maintenance program, which must be approved by their local aviation
authority.
The operator's maintenance program is one of the requirements to obtain the
airworthiness certificate.
Maintenance programs are constantly updated by means of several different
documents, including manufacturer's service bulletins and letters and authority's
airworthiness directives and circulars.
The operator will implement changes to its AMP as it gains experience through the
utilization of the aircraft or due to changes in external factors, such as reduced
flying time due to reduced demand.
Those changes will be analyzed and approved, or not, by the local authority.
So, you now understand the different historical approaches to aircraft maintenance
and the relationship between different organizations, manuals and documents.
That's all for part one. See you in part two.

Part 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Part 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Part 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hello, and welcome to SWENA's training.

You might also like