March 23, 2023 - No. 012 In This Issue : Continental Counterweight AD Expanded : Daily Memo: The New State Of Attracting Aerospace Manufacturing : An Il-76 plane exploded at the Russian aircraft factory : Frank Robinson Remembered : FAA Issues Airworthiness Directive For Cirrus SF50 Parachute System : EASA issues AD to address potential failure of Airbus A350 main landing gear door : Airbus and Qatar Airways reach “amicable settlement” over A350 paint issue : Russian Superjet fleet risks grounding over lack of spark plugs: report Continental Counterweight AD Expanded By Russ Niles - Published: March 15, 2023 The FAA has expanded its AD for certain Continental engines regarding potential manufacturing errors with the engines’ crankshaft counterweights. The original AD has been superseded and several new models added. “Since the FAA issued AD 2023-04-08, the FAA determined that IO-470-A, -C, -F, and -LO; and TSIO-360-F and -FB model engines are also affected by the unsafe condition and should be added to the applicability,” a notice says. “Additionally, the FAA determined that the limitations in the special flight permit paragraph, specifying ‘no metal contamination in the oil filter,’ did not account for trace metal particles that may be found in newer engines due to break-in of the engine.” Operators of the affected engines have to inspect the cranks to ensure the counterweight retaining rings were installed correctly. There had been several instances where the rings were put in incorrectly and the weights came off during flight. Continental spotted the fault and notified the FAA and its customers in February. The expanded AD took effect Wednesday (March 15). Continental Counterweight AD Expanded Daily Memo: The New State Of Attracting Aerospace Manufacturing Michael Bruno-March 10, 2023 Note: See charts in original article. This month, Archer Aviation closed a deal with Georgia state officials for local government incentives and started construction on a manufacturing plant that could produce hundreds of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) vehicles. Last month, rival Joby Aviation said it was “actively evaluating proposals from a number of U.S. states” for that California company’s Phase 1 plant. What do these announcements have in common? The answer: they represent tangible examples of ongoing domestic aerospace manufacturing opportunities and show that U.S. states and localities have much more to compete over, even if large defense primes and commercial OEMs are announcing few new major programs. The catch: like in the business world, leaders and incumbents have many advantages, and the difference between the best and the rest is only hardening as the size and type of new opportunities changes. States and localities no longer can rely on simply wooing a brand-name company that swoops in to create a whole industrial ecosystem, and in turn builds up a sleepy locality. Gone are the days where Airbus puts Mobile, Alabama, on the map for narrowbody final assembly lines, or Boeing boosts North Charleston, South Carolina, into the top echelon of widebody manufacturing. Instead, states and communities must attract small and innovative companies pursuing new defense technology or sustainability-related projects. The new game in local economic development, at least when it comes to aerospace and defense, is landing and supporting new-age efforts such as eVTOLs, supersonic, hypersonics, commercial space startups, sustainable aviation fuels, UAS and counter-drone, and so on. What remains constant is the need for winning localities to create the building blocks themselves, e.g., creating local infrastructure, establishing business tax incentives, embedding workforce development programs, etc. Not surprisingly, those that have been doing well already continue to lead the pack in the latest assessment of domestic best-places to do aerospace business. According to PwC’s just-released aerospace manufacturing attractiveness rankings as of 2022, the latest top states essentially are the same as in 2021 and 2020, with just two exceptions. Virginia rose to ninth from 11th in 2020, while last year’s 10th-place Kansas dropped to 21st. PwC said the sunflower state’s plunge was due to its infrastructure metric (down from second to 25th place). However, the launch in mid-2022 of the Kansas Infrastructure Hub could soon restore the state’s strength on this score. “This year’s state rankings emphasize the impressive resilience of U.S. civil aviation manufacturing, despite the demand and supply-chain shocks of the COVID-19 era and the uncertainties of the current inflationary period,” PwC said. “The need for workforce development—growth, diversification, education and retraining—and the efforts underway to address that need also emerge strongly as themes in many states.” The consultancy advised that states with well-developed supply networks to the U.S. military, especially those that have invested in research and development capabilities in recent years, could expect strong growth in and beyond 2023. Meanwhile, competition among top states to attract space sector investment and green aviation startups reveals a growing emphasis on public-private collaborations and the development of new technologies that cross the boundaries among the civil, defense and space areas. While innovation in past decades was often likely to cascade down into civil aviation from NASA and the military, today the reverse is just as likely. In the midterm, sustainability, new defense technology and commercial space might not be the massive economic engines many localities are hoping for when it comes to moving the proverbial needle of economic development. But with commercial and defense end-markets simultaneously beginning what could be historic up-cycles, industry as a whole could be on the cusp of its greatest buildup ever. Anyone looking to get on board the Great Ramp-Up should look to anchor whatever opportunities they can, and that means setting up their own conditions first. Daily Memo: The New State Of Attracting Aerospace Manufacturing An Il-76 plane exploded at the Russian aircraft factory Asia Aviation Aviation incidents Neighbors Russia World Note: See photos in the original article. The fuselage of the Il-76MD-90A military transport aircraft depressurized during tests at the Russian Aviastar aircraft factory in Ulyanovsk. Russian media reported that six employees of the enterprise were injured as a result of this incident. One of them died from the injuries. Emergency services are working at the scene. The incident occurred inside the hangar where the plane was parked. It is clarified that the enterprise was conducting tests of the fuselage compartment of the IL-76MD-90A military transport aircraft with the pressurized air. At that moment, depressurization occurred, and the aircraft body was destroyed. The media of the aggressor country have not yet reported the extent of damage to the aircraft structure. The causes of the event are being investigated. The Aviastar aircraft factory in Ulyanovsk is part of the PJSC United Aircraft Corporation. The Russian Il-76MD-90A is an updated version of the basic Soviet Il-76MD transport aircraft. Instead of the old D-30KP-2 engines, the more powerful and newer PS-90A-76 are used. According to the Russians, the new engines made it possible to significantly increase the maximum flight range. Engines with a thrust of up to 14.5 tons allow the aircraft to lift up to 60 tons of payload into the air. At the beginning of December last year, the Ministry of Defense of Russia received the Il-76MD-90A military transport aircraft. It was the fourth aircraft of this type built in 2022. As of today, the Aviastar aircraft factory has built 17 copies (including the prototype) of the Il-76MD-90A and one prototype of the Il-78M-90A aerial refueling aircraft under various contracts. An Il-76 plane exploded at the Russian aircraft factory Frank Robinson Remembered by Mark Huber - March 2, 2023, 8:11 AM Frank Robinson pilots his iconic R22 helicopter, which he designed, certified, and put into production after the established helicopter manufacturers rejected his ideas.(Photo: Robinson Helicopter Corp.) Frank Robinson died on Nov. 12, 2022 at the age of 92. He realized his dream of building a small, simple, and affordable helicopter. It transformed the industry and today Robinson Helicopter Corporation is the world’s most prolific civil rotorcraft manufacturer, with nearly 14,000 delivered to date. But it almost didn’t happen. On April 29, 1977, less than two years after its first flight, test pilot Bob Golden was flying the lone R22 prototype when the tail rotor failed. He autorotated into the water and escaped unharmed, but the helicopter sank. Robinson had to recover the wreckage from the Pacific Ocean floor off the coast of southern California and discover and correct the problem, or the R22 program was over. Short on time and funds, he hired a salvage vessel. Three days into the recovery attempt there was still no joy. The salvage diver ran out of duty time and Robinson was almost out of money. There would not be another day of searching. But the boat captain, the diver’s father, was himself a retired diver and Robinson convinced him to submerge. The father found the wreckage and the boat pulled it up. The aft casting on the tail cone had failed. “ They redesigned it, made it five times stronger, and never had an issue with it since,” recalls Robinson’s son and current company CEO, Kurt Robinson. “If that father hadn’t gone down and done the dive, I think Frank would have volunteered to go down and do it,” said Tim Tucker, who first met Robinson in the mid-1970s, took delivery of the first production R22 in 1979, and later became the company’s chief instructor and a driving force behind its now famous safety course. “He just absolutely refused to fail,” Tucker told AIN. “And he wouldn’t let anybody he dealt with let him fail. He wouldn’t let money be a problem, the FAA be a problem, employees be a problem. He had this tenacity that was overpowering.” “He always was stubborn and single-minded,” Kurt recalled. “When he had an idea or a vision, he was really good at pushing it forward and getting other people to help him do it. He never gave up. He always told me, ‘I can’t solve all the problems that I’ve got, but I can solve the ones I need to solve today.’” “As soon as a problem came up, he jumped on it one hundred percent, solved it, and then moved on,” said Tucker. And at times the problems seemed insurmountable. In 1973, aged 43 and a single father of three, Frank Robinson quit his job, mortgaged the house, and set up shop in the garage and the corporate office in the living room. His children were supportive, even though Robinson warned them, “You realize that I’m not going to have any money, and this is going to be a long period of time,” recalled Kurt. Kurt helped build the company’s first hangar at Zamperini Field in Torrance, a small, ramshackle affair with an outhouse, and did data analysis when not attending high school and later college in San Diego. After self-financing and finishing his undergraduate degree, Kurt wanted to work a few years and then pursue an MBA. (Which he would eventually earn along with a law degree.) “I was really into business. I had a job all lined up,” he explained. The R22 had just been certified and Frank Robinson had another idea. Kurt recalled the conversation. Frank said, “We’re getting started on production, how about coming home, working at the company, and helping us set it up. You could live at home and save money so you could go to school.” The pitch worked and Kurt moved home for two years, even though Frank could not afford to pay him. “At that point the hook was set. From there I don’t think there was any doubt that I was going to be part of the company, even after I went back to school,” Kurt said. As focused as he could be on solving a problem, Frank knew when he didn’t have the answer and could delegate, according to Kurt. “He didn’t have all the answers. There would be times when I would walk into his office and say, ‘What are we going to do about this?’ And he would give me a blank look and say, ‘I have no idea, you’ve got to figure it out.’” A seemingly high accident rate for the R22 was one of the problems the company encountered early on. Tim Tucker had served as an Army aviator and worked as a civilian flight instructor when he met Frank Robinson and put down a $300 deposit for that first production R22, list price $42,000 (without the radios). Tucker joined the company in 1982 and he and Frank Robinson together taught Robinson’s early R22 instructor safety courses, having identified instructor experience deficits as a large contributing factor in those accidents. Initially, Robinson petitioned the FAA to increase the time requirements for instructors. When that entreaty became mired in bureaucracy, he took his case directly to insurers, who agreed not only to higher mandated times for R22 instructors but also completion of the Robinson safety course. The course ran from Wednesday through mid-day on Saturday and was a combination of classroom instruction and flying. Between sessions and at lunch, attendees often peppered Robinson with questions, which he cheerfully answered. Tucker recalled those days. “What an opportunity for a flight instructor,” he said. “You could ask Frank any question about the R22. If he couldn’t answer it, nobody could. It was his helicopter. “What impressed me as time went on was his knowledge of metallurgy and manufacturing, not just aerodynamics,” Tucker added, citing Robinson’s use of greaseless bearings, the first for a helicopter, as an example of his innovative thinking. Tucker also credited Robinson’s 2,000-hour whole helicopter overhaul requirement as bringing a new level of predictability to light helicopter maintenance costs. “He was such a unique character,” said Tucker. “He completely changed the world of helicopters.” Tucker pointed out that when the R22 hit the market, most primary rotorcraft instruction would be given in a helicopter like a Bell 47 for prices around $150 an hour. When the R22 came to market, the price could be cut to $48. “It cut the cost of helicopter training by 60 percent.” The export market accounts for 70 percent of Robinson’s sales and Tucker would eventually travel the world teaching Robinson safety courses. Inevitably at these events, attendees approach him to express their gratitude. “They would not be in the world of helicopters, be it as an owner or an operator, without the Robinson helicopter,” he said. “There are a lot of people who rely on us,” noted Kurt. “[Frank] cared so much about aviation and helicopters. Having that passion [for your work] is something that I try to pass along to my kids and our employees. Life is so much more interesting if you get passionate about what you do. I live to work, not work to live.” Frank Robinson Remembered Airworthiness Directives; Cirrus Design Corporation Airplanes SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Cirrus Design Corporation (Cirrus) Model SF50 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of an accident and an incident due to uncommanded activation of the Cirrus Airframe Parachute System (CAPS) autopilot mode while in flight. This AD requires booting the avionics in configuration mode, inhibiting the CAPS autopilot, fabricating and installing information placards, revising the existing airplane flight manual (AFM) for your airplane, and revising the airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the existing airplane maintenance manual (AMM) or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) and your existing approved maintenance or inspection program, as applicable. For certain airplanes, this AD also requires modifying the wiring to remove the CAPS power timer functionality. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. FAA Issues Airworthiness Directive For Cirrus SF50 Parachute System EASA issues AD to address potential failure of Airbus A350 main landing gear door BY RYTIS BERESNEVICIUS 2023-03-10 The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has issued an Airworthiness Directive (AD) to address a potential failure of the main landing gear door (MLGD) on the Airbus A350-900. EASA issued the directive following the discovery of index washers at MLGD hinges #1 (forward) and #3 (rear) being inverted in production, meaning that the forward hinges were fitted in place of the rear hinges and vice-versa. According to the agency, if the condition is not corrected, it “could lead to reduced structural integrity of the MLGD hinge fittings, possibly resulting in in-flight loss of a MLGD”. As a result, the doors of the main landing gear could fall to the ground and injure people below. Airbus issued its own Service Bulletin (SB), namely A350-52-P048, providing inspection and replacement parts of the affected parts, while the AD itself “requires a one-time detailed inspection (DET) of each affected part and, depending on findings, replacement”. The EASA’s directive requires operators of the Airbus A350-900 to complete a DET within the compliance time. For Group 1 aircraft, that means before exceeding 9,600 flight cycles (FC) or 46,900 flight hours (FH), whichever occurs soonest since the aircraft’s manufacturing date. Meanwhile, operators of Group 2 aircraft must complete the inspection before exceeding 16,800 FC or 82,750, whichever occurs soonest since the aircraft’s manufacturing date. Group 1 and Group 2 aircraft are identified by having the Manufacturer Serial Number (MSN) as Configuration 001 and Configuration 002 in the SB, respectively. Following an inspection, if the affected parts are found not to have been correctly installed, airlines will need to replace them within 500 FC or 3,500 FH, whichever occurs first. The AD is a final ruling. Only a single party commented on the directive, namely Qatar Airways, which indicated there was no way for operators “verify/cross-examine the accuracy of the effectivity within the ISB or to justify the exclusion of certain MSNs”. Qatar Airways’ own A350-900s, namely A7-AMK and A7-AML were excluded from the SB. According to the airline, Airbus provided feedback that this condition was “corrected before delivery and that it is in-line with Airbus Internal documents”. EASA partially agreed, indicating that Airbus will revise the SB A350-52-P048 without making changes to the AD. According to ch-aviation.com data, the highest FH number relates to a Qatar Airways A350-900 at 30,001 FHs. However, the aircraft, registered as A7-ALA, is currently stored at Doha Hamad International Airport (DOH) where it has been since June 2021. Meanwhile, Vietnam Airlines’ A350-900, registered as VN-A886, has 6,342 FCs. EASA issues AD to address potential failure of Airbus A350 main landing gear door Kiefer/Wikimedia Airbus and Qatar Airways reach “amicable settlement” over A350 paint issue BY MIQUEL ROS 2023-02-01 Kiefer/Wikimedia One of the highest-stakes legal imbroglios that have rocked the aviation industry of late seems to have finally reached a peaceful conclusion. In a note made public on February 1, 2023, Airbus announced the end of its legal dispute with Qatar Airways, stating that the two parties had reached an “amicable and mutually agreeable settlement” that “is not an admission of liability for either party”. The exact terms of the agreement remain confidential. This long-going saga started towards the end of 2020 when Qatar Airways complained that it had detected cracks in the paint of some of its newly acquired A350 aircraft and subsequently grounded part of its fleet. Airbus rejected all allegations that safety could have been compromised due to this issue. Qatar Airways had 53 Airbus A350 aircraft (34 of the –900 version and 19 of the –1000 one), in its fleet, plus outstanding orders for 19 more of the type when this conflict erupted. What followed were months of very public wrangling and a lawsuit, with the matter expected to be resolved at London’s High Court. A preliminary court hearing took place in London on January 19, 2023, where it became known that Airbus had implemented some design changes affecting parts of its production process, allegedly in response to the concerns about this matter. Airbus’ note further states that the airline and aircraft manufacturer are working together on a repair program to get the affected aircraft back in the air. Interestingly, the wording of the announcement hints at the fact that Airbus and Qatar Airways may get back to working together in the future. It is worth noting that, as a result of this dispute, Airbus had unilaterally canceled Qatar Airways’ all outstanding aircraft orders, including for 50 A321neo aircraft, forcing the airline to look for alternatives at short notice in order to stick to its planned growth program. Airbus and Qatar Airways reach “amicable settlement” over A350 paint issue Russian Superjet fleet risks grounding over lack of spark plugs: report BY CLEMENT CHARPENTREAU 2023-03-16 Part of the fleet of Superjet 100 passenger aircraft reportedly risks grounding over a lack of US-made spark plugs for the Franco-Russian SaM-146 engines. The information was reported by the Telegram channel Aviatorshchina, a Russian telegram channel that regularly publishes insider stories from the aviation industry. “Over the past 11 months, spark plugs have been supplied by PJSC UEC- Saturn from its reserves, but at the moment, PJSC UAC-Saturn has difficulties in providing this service,” a notice shared by the channel reads. “The current situation leads to the risk of stopping part of the airlines’ RRJ95 [another name for the SSJ100 – ed. note] aircraft fleet in the near future and the gradual complete cessation of flights of the entire fleet of RRJ-95 aircraft, which jeopardizes the implementation of the flight program for the transportation of passengers, including socially significant ones.” Saturn, a subsidiary of the Russian state company United Engine Corporation, is one of the two companies forming PowerJet, a joint venture in charge of producing and supporting the SaM146, the sole engine powering the Sukhoi Superjet 100 airliner. The other company involved in the joint venture is the French engine manufacturer Safran. Before sanctions were applied against Russian aviation in the aftermath of the invasion of Ukraine, engine spark plugs for the SaM-146 engines were manufactured by the US-based company Unison Industries. In late March 2022, PowerJet, the Russian-French manufacturer of the SaM146 engines, said it would suspend its engine maintenance and repair services. A month later, several Russian airlines operating the Sukhoi Superjet 100 warned that they might have to ground the aircraft soon. Russia hopes to replace the SaM146 engine by its own indigenous design, the Aviadvigatel PD-8. In May 2022, Russian state conglomerate Rostec said it completed the static testing program of the domestic turbofan engine. According to ch-aviation data, 140 SSJ100 are currently active, while 73 are either stored or under maintenance. UPDATE 17-03-2023, 15:32 (UTC +3): Six SSJ100 operators, including IrAero, Azimut Airlines, and Yakutia, confirmed the existence of a spark plug shortage to the Russian portal RBC. Russian Superjet fleet risks grounding over lack of spark plugs: report Curt Lewis