October 4, 2023 - No. 041

In This Issue 

: Aircraft mechanic shortage reaches ‘critical’ point

: Kalitta Air Selects TrustFlight’s Electronic Technical Log for Air Cargo Operations

: Making aviation history, the FAA enables drone delivery at scale

: Aircraft Certifications and the Integration of Crewed and Uncrewed Aviation

: https://aviationweek.com/mro/aircraft-propulsion/aog-technics-ordered-provide-details-engine-parts-transactions

: Aftermarket Demand In Q2 Beat Expectations: RBC Capital Markets Matthew Fulco July 31, 2023

: Why-arent-complex-aircraft-equipped-with-annunciators-alerting-pilots-in-plain-language-not-just tones.

: Maintenance error leads to in-flight oil leak

: Facing worker shortage, Boeing hopes to recruit young minds to aerospace industry 

: Rolls-Royce nozzle breakthrough brings hydrogen plane engines closer to reality

: Rotax, Anyone?


 


Aircraft mechanic shortage reaches ‘critical’ point
By General Aviation News Staff · September 27, 2023 

A new report from AAR Corp., a company that provides aviation services to commercial and government operators, MROs, and OEMs, warns that the aircraft mechanic shortage has reached a critical point.

The company’s 2023 Mid Skills Gap report urges employers to “break down silos” and collaborate with high schools, colleges, non-profit organzations, and elected officials to expand early access to aviation maintenance curriculum and training.

“Mid skills” describes careers that require industry certifications but not a college degree, including aviation mechanics, according to officials with AAR, which has been putting together the report since 2011.

The 2023 report includes several suggestions to increase the number of aviation mechanics, including:
•	Work with lawmakers and state agencies, nonprofits and educators to launch a national campaign to raise awareness of aviation careers.
•	Encourage training programs to teach people with industry experience how to instruct others to build the faculty population.
•	Ask lawmakers to pass common sense immigration policies that allow aviation companies to recruit talent from abroad to meet demand and keep airplanes flying safely.
•	Make it easier for veterans to quickly transition their skills to appropriate industry jobs.
•	Push to eliminate restrictions on AMTs taking the FAA general exam as pilots can do with their written exams. Getting these exams completed early will lead to increased certifications for the industry, officials noted.
•	Increase training capacity by creating programs to make experienced retirees instructors in education programs.

“These processes won’t happen overnight,” the report’s executive summary states. “There is much work to be done in the coming years. The goal of this report is to show that the challenges ahead can be overcome if industry employers act collaboratively, creatively and, above all, urgently.”

“Workforce development is a team effort across industry, education, and government,” said John M. Holmes, AAR’s Chairman, President and CEO. “Given the forecasted demand for aviation maintenance technicians, these efforts could not come at a better time.”

“We have the facilities to grow. We just need the talent,” said Ryan Goertzen, AAR’s Vice President of Workforce Development. “Companies that invest in training must look to solve the issue not only for themselves, but for the industry.”

You can read the entire report here.

 

 


Kalitta Air Selects TrustFlight’s Electronic Technical Log for Air Cargo Operations
TrustFlight in Great Britain will provide its electronic tech log, reliability analytics, and fleet oversight tools for Ypsilanti-based global cargo airline Kalitta Air’s fleet of 29 aircraft.
By Jim Stickford -
September 18, 2023

Kalitta Air is using new software to record its fleet’s tech logs. // Photo courtesy of Kalitta Air

TrustFlight in Great Britain will provide its electronic tech log, reliability analytics, and fleet oversight tools for Ypsilanti-based global cargo airline Kalitta Air’s fleet of 29 aircraft.

Air cargo operators such as Kalitta Air use tech logs to record airframe usage and discrepancies for internal and regulatory oversight.

As a global standard operating procedure, a log is completed for every flight operation by civilian and military aircraft operators. While most air freight carriers currently utilize paper-based reporting systems, Kalitta Air will deploy TrustFlight’s digital tech log solution.

In addition, Kalitta Air will use TrustFlight’s reliability analytics and fleet oversight tools to gain a real-time analysis of their fleet to optimize maintenance activities.
“Implementing electronic logs enables us to benefit from increased operational efficiencies and maintain our reputation for reliable on-time performance worldwide,” says Christopher Barks, director of quality control and chief inspector for Kalitta Air. “TrustFlight impressed us with the capability and ease of use of their systems alongside their knowledge of maintenance processes.”

“Kalitta Air is a pioneer in air cargo, globally recognized for its long history of success and operational acumen,” says Karl Steeves, director of TrustFlight. “They are well-positioned to transition to all-digital tech log record keeping. We’re proud that they have entrusted TrustFlight for this task.”


 


Making aviation history, the FAA enables drone delivery at scale
Drones in the U.S. are now allowed to make long-range deliveries without someone watching from the ground. This is a landmark step towards bringing people universal, on-demand access to the products they need.
Liam O'Connor

In 2012, Congress ruled that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) needed to safely integrate autonomous commercial drones into the U.S. airspace to ensure economic competitiveness. On September 18, the FAA announced a landmark decision that meaningfully delivers on this vision. 

For more than a decade, even the most advanced long-range drone deliveries in the U.S. required visual observers, stationed on the ground along a route, to watch the sky during the delivery. The FAA has now authorized Zipline to make commercial deliveries beyond visual line of sight without visual observers. 

Zipline has long worked hand-in-hand with the FAA on our groundbreaking technology that enables safe deconfliction with other air traffic participants. Our onboard perception safety system has been tested and proven to enable continuous, real-time airspace monitoring — one of the capabilities Congress identified as necessary for commercial drone deliveries to safely scale. 

This system has been tested by flying tens of thousands of real-world miles around the globe and through tens of thousands of test encounters with aircraft. It has been designed to operate with the highest level of safety regardless of visual observers along flight routes. 

This exemption from the FAA represents a monumental shift for logistics and equitable access in the U.S. It builds the foundation for Zipline to scale to deliver food, medicine, consumer goods and other supplies to millions of Americans on-demand, and to do so in an environmentally conscious way, resulting in 97% fewer emissions per delivery than a gas-powered vehicle. 

Zipline can now have the kind of positive impact in the U.S. that we’ve had in other countries where we can fly more than 140 miles round trip, beyond the visual line of sight of any observer, all day every day. We have flown over 50 million commercial autonomous miles around the world, carrying everything from blood, pharmaceuticals, vaccines, educational materials, food, and convenience items to tens of millions of people. For example, our deliveries have brought education supplies to children in Ghana who live in areas cut off by flooding, and blood, on-demand, to doctors in Rwanda performing life-saving surgeries.

These may seem like extreme examples, but people in the U.S. have also normalized systemic supply chain issues — such as living in food deserts or settling for slow turnaround times for medical tests — that affect their quality of life. We are already working with U.S. partners now to deliver pharmaceutical supplies directly to patients’ homes, help businesses bring customers fresh food, and quickly transport temperature-sensitive lab samples for faster diagnoses. 

This decision will improve millions of American lives. We applaud the FAA for making it possible, and enabling such a powerful change on the horizon.


 


Aircraft Certifications and the Integration of Crewed and Uncrewed Aviation

 Juan Plaza
    
For decades aviation companies have been certifying the airworthiness of their aircraft with the civil aviation authorities of basically three regions of the world. In the US, Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have worked together to produce and certify, respectively, some of the most iconic and reliable aircraft in the history of aviation. Same in Europe with Airbus and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and, more recently, with Embraer and ANAC in Brazil.

Using current standards, the certification of an aircraft is a costly and lengthy affair. That is why only crewed technology is going through the process—because the return justifies the investment. That is not the case with smaller non-piloted aircraft that will never recover the certification investment (if we use today’s standards, that is).

With notable exceptions in smaller geographies, the certification of aircraft seems to be destined to happen almost exclusively in these three areas. But does it have to be this way for advanced air mobility (AAM) and uncrewed aviation vehicles (UAVs) or drones?
Not necessarily. So far, most civil aviation authorities (CAA) in the world have focused on certifying operations, not technology (read aircraft) except for the large three mentioned before and a few others, like China, with nascent aviation industries.
With the democratization of aviation technologies and uncrewed aviation fighting for a seat at the table, affordable prices for components are allowing small aircraft manufacturers all around the world to approach their respective civil aviation authorities and asking for certification of their new designs.

According to decades-long airspace treaties, all that a regional CAA needs to certify aircraft is to be a member in good standing of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). As more and more non-piloted aircraft manufacturers request their country’s CAA to certify their UAV’s or air taxis, these organizations will gain experience and share intelligence with the FAA, EASA, and ANAC. Soon, we will have a robust worldwide machinery of aircraft certification.

How would this affect the integration of crewed and uncrewed aviation? For one, it will not be so revolutionary as it seems, given the fact that today’s ICAO has managed to unify all flying rules around the globe for crewed aviation operations. Without this compatibility of operations, airlines will not be able to travel from one country to another without exposing everyone to incredible dangers.

For example, today a German pilot commanding a Dutch jet airliner can take off from Charles de Gaule airport in Paris and travel halfway around the world and land in Singapore using the same phraseology to communicate with air traffic control (ATC) and use the same exact takeoff, climb, cruise, descend, approach, and landing procedures along the route. This unification of processes was not easy or fast, but as the jet era took over the world in the early sixties, countries realized that it was in their best interests that skies should be safe and passengers should easily travel from point A to Point B, increasing commerce and opening the doors to today’s enormous tourism industry.

So, if ICAO and every member country were capable of reaching an agreement with piloted aircraft and passengers on board, one would think it should be easy to extend that agreement to uncrewed aviation without much delay.

This unification of processes and procedures will be a catalyst to the uncrewed aviation industry as we approach the era of regular flights beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) of the operator. In today’s world in which most flights are conducted under Part 107 or its international region equivalent, no aircraft is supposed to be crossing international boundaries. But as soon as we have flights in which the operator with the controls is not in the immediate vicinity of the aircraft, we will have situations that involve different jurisdictions and, by default, questions of responsibility and potential liabilities.

Imagine an operator in Miami flying a drone in Canada. What jurisdiction will be used in case of an accident? The place where the accident occurred or the legislation of the country where the Pilot in Command (PIC) made the decisions that led to the accident?

These and other questions will need to be addressed and codified into international law by the CAAs of the world in concert with ICAO by the time we live in a world where the pilot is not necessarily onboard the aircraft.

Having hundreds of CAAs with the experience of certifying, not only operations, but also aircraft, will be beneficial to the effort to integrate crewed and non-crewed aircraft as more and more public servants around the world will understand the realities that rule the use of these two ways of controlling a flying vessel over international borders.

During the recent Commercial UAV Expo in Las Vegas, we learned from the FAA that they are aiming at August 2024 to publish their BVLOS NPRM (notice of proposed rulemaking) and also that the US President Biden has nominated Michael G. Whitaker to lead the federal agency, marking an important milestone in the advancement of uncrewed aviation.

As we wait for the FAA, under new management, to issue their BVLOS regulations and we perfect our uncrewed traffic management (UTM) systems and fine tune onboard detect and avoid (DAA) services, the industry moves forward, perhaps slowly, but surely towards full integration.

If the jet era opened the doors to massive and affordable international travel, we can only imagine what a similar approach to uncrewed aviation will do for commerce and the optimization of processes that today use vehicles with technology that is basically hundreds of years’ old. Exciting times are ahead as we watch how countries try to solve the conundrum of integration as we all run towards an international agreement on how to add uncrewed aviation to the skies of the world.


 


AOG Technics Ordered To Provide Details Of Engine Parts Transactions
Sean Broderick 
September 20, 2023

AOG Technics, the UK-based broker accused of selling thousands of engine parts with falsified paperwork, has been ordered to turn over records of its GE Aerospace-related transactions, a London court ordered. 

The London High Court ruling, issued during a Sept. 20 hearing gives the company 14 days to hand over details on any CFM56 and CF6 parts it acquired and sold, along with relevant supporting documentation. The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed Sept. 7 by CFM and its co-owners, GE Aerospace and Safran against AOG Technics and founder Jose Zamora Yrala. 

A summary of the manufacturer’s argument before the court confirms that falsified airworthiness approval tags and other relevant records have been linked to thousands of parts sold by AOG Technics. The probe has turned up 86 examples of forged documents, some covering many parts. 

In one case, the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) turned over one of its AAC-038 approval tags, later confirmed as fake, that came with 32 overhauled CFM56 high pressure compressor (HPC) stage 1 vanes. Two fake FAA 8130-3s covering hundreds of GE CF6 parts were found, the summary said. More than 80 EASA Form 1s representing thousands of CFM56 parts, including turbine blades and seals, have been flagged and confirmed as forgeries. 

In all cases, the fake documentation was made to look like it came from CFM or one of its owners. 

So far, no life-limited parts have been flagged in the probe.  

AOG Technics parts have been found on 96 engines so far—a figure that is likely to grow given the number of parts confirmed to have fake records. 

Gaining insight on AOG Technics’ transactions will help the industry quantify the scope and risk of its scheme. Knowing who it sold parts to will aid CFM, operators, maintenance providers and regulators in their effort to confirm whether they are airworthy and isolate any questionable parts. Learning where AOG Technics got the material is just as critical, as it will help quantify the hazard level the parts present. 
“We applaud the court’s ruling compelling AOG Technics to release documentation that will aid the industry in more rapidly identifying parts sold with fraudulent documentation so they can be promptly addressed,” CFM said in a statement. 
“Safety is our first priority, and we are taking aggressive legal action against AOG Technics for selling unapproved aircraft engine parts with falsified airworthiness documentation. We remain united with the aviation community in working to keep unapproved parts out of the global supply chain.” 

Several airlines have confirmed having AOG Technics parts on their engines, including Southwest Airlines, United Airlines and Virgin Australia. Bloomberg was first to report the airlines involved. 

CFM and its co-owners, GE Aerospace and Safran, have been working with industry since June to flag parts sold by AOG Technics with falsified records, the court briefing revealed. TAP Maintenance and Engineering flagged EASA Form 1s linked to “certain” CFM56 parts and allegedly generated by CFM.  

The engine manufacturer confirmed the records were false, highlighting fake purchase-order numbers and an unknown signature. 

TAP then turned over 24 more Form 1s shipped with CFM56 parts bought by AOG Technics and allegedly generated by the manufacturer. These were forged as well, CFM concluded. 

The findings prompted CFM to alert industry and regulators, kicking off a global records review to find parts sold by AOG Technics and either pull them from service or remove them from spare parts supplies if related documentation was determined to be fake. 

An early August European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) bulletin urged operators and repair stations to review their records, flag any parts in their possession that passed through AOG Technics, and verify whether airworthiness approval tags were generated by the companies listed on them. Parts with falsified records should be quarantined, EASA said. EASA later confirmed the discovery of many forged documents. 

The UK Civil Aviation Administration (CAA) issued a similar bulletin, noting that “some” AOG Technics parts were installed on UK-registered aircraft.  

The FAA confirmed it is working with its European counterparts on the issue. 
“The FAA is investigating the issue and is coordinating closely with the European Aviation Safety Agency and the UK Civil Aviation Authority,” the agency said. “The FAA takes suspected unapproved parts cases very seriously and takes action as necessary for safety.”


 


Aftermarket Demand In Q2 Beat Expectations: RBC Capital Markets
Matthew Fulco 
July 31, 2023

Sales in the commercial aftermarket increased 23% year-on-year in the second quarter, beating analysts' expectations.

The commercial aftermarket outlook remains highly favorable as total sales rose 23% year-on-year in the 2023 second quarter (Q2), according to a recent report by RBC Capital Markets. 

Chiefly driving the better-than-expected expansion were engine MRO sales—up 30% in Q2 compared to 18% in the first quarter (Q1)—while the outlook for full-year sales growth has now risen to 18%. 

“With industry fundamentals remaining strong, we believe the outlook for [the second half of 2023] is encouraging. We believe the results will support the continued bullish view on the commercial aftermarket,” analysts Ken Herbert and Stephen Strackhouse said in the report. 

RBC Capital Markets expects the pricing environment to remain favorable for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). In Q2, the average spare part and material was just below 9%, down slightly from the Q1 peak of more than 9%. 
However, based on recent distributor checks, the ability of OEMs to pass on higher prices continues; heading into 2024, they are likely to hike the prices of spare parts. The companies set to benefit the most from rising spare parts prices include TDG Aerospace, General Electric, and RTX Technologies.

Looking ahead, provided that passenger traffic trends remain strong and supply chains pressured, the factors for a strong aftermarket should endure—though OEM pricing is likely to normalize at some point in 2024. 

At the same time, as supply chains continue to normalize, and MRO turnaround times improve, airlines are likely to lower inventory levels. In the next six months, the outlook for parts purchasing is lagging MRO sales by more than 400 basis points, the highest since the pandemic. 

Meanwhile, the outlook for engines generally remains robust, buoyed by resilient demand for legacy narrowbody engine MRO activity (CFM56-5B/7B and V2500), while the demand for widebody engine MRO should accelerate into 2024. Current high utilization on many widebody aircraft, such as the Boeing 787 and the Airbus A350, is limiting the engine spend today. 

However, more than 70% of MROs see the aircraft-on-the-ground (AOG) issue as a result of the Pratt & Whitney geared turbofan (GTF) engine delays peaking in the fourth quarter or later. 

Overall, Herbert and Strackhouse say that Q2 results “continue to support the thesis that the aftermarket remains a ‘safe’ place for investors,” adding that “we believe investors remain concerned about the pace of growth in aircraft production at Airbus and Boeing, and the strong traffic trends provide continued support for aftermarket spending.”


 


We hear reports of pilots' failing to understand a situation: "They didn't realize the auto pilot was engaged…" or similar. Why aren't complex aircraft equipped with annunciators alerting pilots in plain language, not just tones and lights.

John Tringali Captain for major airline typed in MD88/90, B717,737,757,767)

Taught Aircraft Performance and Dynamics at Caltech. and Paul Mulwitz
Licensed private pilot, amateur airplane builder and test pilot.Author has 3.3K answers and 9.7M answer views

I think it has to do with engineers vs operators. The engineers just think differently than we do.

Here’s a story.
I flew C-17s for my whole career in the USAF, they have 2 HUDS (head-up displays) and the cockpit looks like this:

Simple enough right? So when I got assigned to Altus AFB, which is the schoolhouse, the commanders knew I was experienced in the jet (6 years at that time), liked computers and things like that, and just got on station so I’d be there at least 3 years… so they assigned me to be the pilot liaison with Boeing. I’d fly out to Longbeach and help do design work with them, show how displays should look and test some stuff out. It was VERY eye-opening as a pilot, answering that question you asked “why do they build it x way?”

So I was working with them on this system called FFS (Formation Flight System) which was an upgrade to SKE (Station Keeping Equipment) which allowed the jets to fly in formation with each other, on autopilot, in the weather and for long periods of time. Like, Charleston to Germany types of formations. Since it was a new design many different users wanted new functionality for their particular mission. Special Ops wanted a way to inhibit and limit electronic emissions, so they wanted to be able to make this system go into low power or even off. So as they’re showing the planned display in a big briefing (called the CDR or critical design review) they show the modes in the upper right corner of the selected MFD would be something like HI, LOW, STBY, and FAIL written in cyan. Fail, I thought. So I spoke up “What kind of mode is fail? Is that total system failure? If so shouldn’t it be written in big yellow letters across the center of the display FAIL?” They just sort of looked at me like a deer in the headlights. “I suppose” the lead engineer said. “But it’s more lines of code to write. This way it just uses the same SLOC (single line of code) as the other modes but if you want it to look like that we’ll have to increase the contract price.”

Then the world blew up. I said “Well yeah, we really can’t see the top inch or so of those displays anyway.” HO-LE-SHIT-BALLS, that meeting came to a halt. “What? What do you mean you can’t see the tops of the displays????” I explained that back when then were smaller CRTs we could but when they upgraded to bigger LCDs the AFCS panel (that center piece between the HUDS that sticks out) blocks the view of the tops of those center screens unless you duck your head down, so we (pilots) prefer if you don’t put any important information there. Meeting halted, cockpit design team called in.

“We designed the height for those screens, look!” And I see a little person in a picture of a cockpit with eye angles BUT there’s another one, higher, overlaid with a different eye line. “What’s with this second eyeline?” I asked “That’s for the HUD, the cockpit eye line is different than the HUD.” “WHY, in God’s name, would you do that? We fly around with the HUD all the time.” They replied “Why would you do that? We only were contracted to put the HUD in for landings, the rest of the time you should have it retracted and off.” To me, that’s like saying “Why are you using your car all the time? You should just use it for going to the mailbox and you should use your bike everywhere else.” For a pilot it was insane.

No, I explained “We fly with the HUD up almost all the time, and we use it for visual references for wingtip clearance when taxiing, ridge crossings, formation flying, air refueling, instrument approaches… just for everything. It’s the best tool in the cockpit!” They then figured out why we were burning through those things so fast because they weren’t designed to work all the time. The engineers thought we’d fly like an airliner, basically just sitting back for takeoff and cruise, then pull up the HUD only for an assault landing and that’s it. From a pilot’s point of view, having a tool that overlays all your needed data over the existing world is amazing, from an engineering world they just assume we always keep our eyes in the cockpit on the internal instruments unless one of the computers warns us to look outside.

They’re just a different style of person, and so if you don’t have a pilot type sitting on the engineering team you can get weird, non-intuitive displays. It’s like going to a male gynaecologist, or getting your car repaired by someone who doesn’t own or drive a car.


 


Maintenance error leads to in-flight oil leak
By General Aviation News Staff · September 26, 2023 

This is an excerpt from a report made to the Aviation Safety Reporting System. The narrative is written by the pilot, rather than FAA or NTSB officials. To maintain anonymity, many details, such as aircraft model or airport, are often scrubbed from the reports.

I was VFR on-top on an IFR flight plan from ZZZ direct to ZZZ1. My Mooney M-20 T Predator had two cylinders replaced at an aircraft maintenance shop about 5 tachometer hours previously. The engine oil level was measured normal (7 quarts) before the flight.

At about the state line, I noticed fluctuations of the engine oil pressure indication. This was concerning, so I made a 180 turn and informed ATC that I was returning to my departure airport.

I then observed the oil pressure gradually decrease toward the red line.
I determined that ZZZ2 was the closest airport, and informed ATC that I was diverting there. Fortunately my engine kept running without high temperatures and I landed at ZZZ2 safely.

Exiting the airplane, I saw a lot of oil behind the left side of the cowling.

After calling flight service to inform ATC of my landing, I contacted a local mechanic, and removed the engine cowling.

The mechanic found loose rocker-cover screws on the recently-replaced cylinders, one of which was missing the exhaust valve rocker cover, causing an oil leak. Only a small quantity of oil remained in the engine.

Obviously, more careful torque-checking of the screws by the mechanics should have been done.

I was very lucky to have made the airport before oil starvation and engine seizure, which could have occurred minutes later.

In retrospect, I should have immediately diverted to the nearest airport at the first indication of an anomalous oil pressure reading, instead of several minutes later.
My current awareness of how this incident could have ended badly will shorten this response time, should I be unfortunate enough to have a similar experience again.

Primary Problem: Aircraft


 


Facing worker shortage, Boeing hopes to recruit young minds to aerospace industry

Author: Eric Wilkinson
Published: 5:57 PM PDT September 27, 2023
Updated: 10:08 AM PDT September 28, 2023
 
EVERETT, Wash. — One by one, the future of aerospace in western Washington filed into Boeing's Future of Flight Museum on Wednesday.
Among those leading the way was 12-year-old Weston Lavigueure.

Thirty middle schoolers from Snohomish County visited the museum for a hands-on learning session involving aeronautics, robotics, aviation, electronics and manufacturing.

The eighth graders flew drones, practiced welding via virtual reality and wrote code that directed the movement of robots. 

Inspiring stuff for kids like Lavigueure.
"It does get me pretty interested in it, just seeing all the options you can do," Lavigueure said.

According to Snohomish County, Boeing and Paine Field bring $60 billion to the Washington economy every year, supporting 158,000 jobs. But thousands of planes are on backlog and a skilled worker shortage is slowing recovery from the pandemic.

With post-pandemic graduation rates slipping, and a generation less likely to be as well off as their parents, will there be a young, educated workforce to keep the local aerospace industry growing?
 
"The kids need to be getting into the stream right now and asking themselves if they like 3-D printing, green fuels, manufacturing, engineering so that when they land and start looking for a job they're ready," said Dave Somers, Snohomish County executive.

Boeing is working to hire 800 people per month in the Puget Sound region. 
Machinist union president Jon Holden said there will be plenty of opportunity for future generations.

Holden said increased production rates on the 737 and a fourth 737 line coming to Everett, along with more work on the 777X and emerging green technologies make aerospace a solid choice for young people with or without a college degree.

"I think if we do the work to share that information with young kids coming up, they'll be inspired to get into aerospace, as well," Holden said.

That's what events like the one at the Future of Flight are for.

And as Lavigueure sketched out the plans for his future, he liked what he saw in aerospace.

"It lets me see the different opportunities that are possible for me," Lavigueure said.


 

Rolls-Royce nozzle breakthrough brings hydrogen plane engines closer to reality

By Jack Loughran
Published Tuesday, September 26, 2023

Rolls-Royce has reached a key milestone in developing a hydrogen-powered engine as part of plans to develop net zero planes, the engine maker has said.
The firm is working with partner easyJet to develop hydrogen combustion engine technology capable of powering a range of aircraft from the mid-2030s onwards.

It said it completed tests on a full annular combustor of a Pearl 700 engine, which was running solely on hydrogen fuel. The test proves that the fuel can be combusted at conditions needed to achieve maximum take-off thrust.

The engine used newly developed fuel spray nozzles to allow for precise control over the combustion process.

“This involved overcoming significant engineering challenges as hydrogen burns far hotter and more rapidly than kerosene,” Rolls-Royce said.

The nozzles, which were tested at Loughborough University’s recently upgraded National Centre for Combustion and Aerothermal Technology (NCCAT), were able to control the flame position using a new system that progressively mixes air with the hydrogen to manage the fuel’s reactivity.

Earlier this month, a group of UK-based aviation and renewable energy companies including easyJet and Rolls-Royce established the UK Hydrogen in Aviation alliance in a bid to decarbonise flying.

The partnership aims to ensure that the UK puts in place the infrastructure, policy, regulatory and safety frameworks needed to be ready for when the first hydrogen-powered aircraft takes to the skies.

Last year, easyJet and Rolls-Royce ran a modern aero engine, an AE2100, on green hydrogen at Boscombe Down, UK.

The recent tests have improved the engineers’ understanding of the combustion element of the hydrogen programme, while work continues on systems to deliver the fuel to the engine and integrate those systems with an engine.

Grazia Vittadini, technology chief at Rolls-Royce, said: “This is an incredible achievement in a short space of time. Controlling the combustion process is one of the key technology challenges the industry faces in making hydrogen a real aviation fuel of the future. We have achieved that, and it makes us eager to keep moving forward.”

Johan Lundgren, CEO of easyJet, said: “We believe hydrogen is the future of short-haul aviation, and the success of this test and progress being made demonstrates that this is becoming ever closer. We remain optimistic that it will play a critical role in helping us achieve the ambitious goals we set out in our net zero roadmap.”

Rolls-Royce and easyJet are now preparing to undertake a full ground test on a Pearl engine running on solely liquid hydrogen.


 


Rotax, Anyone?
Robert Haag’s RV-4/600 is powered by a Rotax 915 iS engine.
By Ken Scott
September 28, 2023

Note: Be sure to see lots of cool pictures in the original article.

Anyone who has flown an RV-4 will tell you that the only thing that flies better than an RV-4 is a lighter RV-4. However, not many pilots will get the chance to fly a truly light one.

Van’s long-ago first brochures listed the weight of his 150-hp/wood-prop prototype at about 905 pounds, but that proved very difficult to achieve in the customer-built world. Most builders could not accept Van’s spartan ideas about interior comforts, instruments and other appointments and soon a 950-pound RV-4 was considered light. Then came bigger engines, constant-speed propellers, IFR instrumentation, full interiors and controls for both seats, and weights around 1000 pounds became common. (My neighbor’s RV-4, with an injected O-320 and a three-blade constant-speed composite prop, weighs 1015 pounds and performs very well indeed.)

Robert Haag found room for a whole lot of “mechanical” inside the tight confines of an RV-4 cowl.

So now consider an RV-4 with a ballistic parachute, single-lever computerized power controls, three-blade constant-speed prop, fuel injection and 135 hp available at 15,000 feet. Sound good? Now imagine all that with an empty weight half a human lighter than Van’s bare-bones prototype!

That is exactly what German engineer Robert Haag has designed, built and flown. His RV-4/600 mates the time-tested RV-4 airframe with the Rotax 915 iS engine and the result is an RV-4 like nobody has seen before.

Robert, 45, was first introduced to airplanes by a family friend who was a flight instructor. “One trip to the airport…and the virus struck,” he says. At 15 he started flying gliders, then powered gliders, then more powerful airplanes, ending up with his own flight instructor rating. Graduating high school, he found an apprenticeship as an aircraft mechanic. Building on the hands-on experience, he returned to school and earned a degree in mechanical engineering. After 13 years in the R&D department of a fire truck manufacturer, he returned to his first love and began engineering, designing and prototype building Light Sport Aircraft. In 2015 he designed his own large hangar and built it on an airfield near Aalen, about 90 kilometers east of Stuttgart. Most of the space is dedicated to light-aircraft maintenance, but Robert kept some room for his own projects. One project in particular had been in the back of his mind for some time.
Robert’s penchant for cleanliness extends
to his shop. That floor is waaay too clean.
Something Different
“Over the years I’d flown several RVs, and as Van says, ‘The smile never goes away,’” Robert noted. “But in Germany building an RV was becoming more difficult. The Lycoming engine requires avgas, which is getting harder to find in Europe and very expensive. The straight-exhaust Lycoming has difficulty meeting noise regulations. And of course, it is made in America, which means it must be imported into Germany, where shipping costs and taxes add to the already high prices. In my business I became very familiar with Rotax engines, which are made in Austria, not far from where I am based. I became very interested in the Rotax 915 iS. It was rated at 135 hp and because it was turbocharged, it could maintain that power up to higher altitudes. It was also approved for auto fuel. Best of all, it weighed a lot less.” (Actual engine installed weights are difficult to determine. In round numbers, a 160-hp O-320 with a prop governor, baffles and exhaust system weighs about 290 pounds. The Rotax 915 iS, similarly equipped, is just under 200 pounds—a delta of around 90 pounds.)

“I remembered flying an O-320 powered RV-4 and I thought if I made careful choices and did some good engineering, I could build an RV-4 that would meet the 600-kilogram (1320-pound) gross weight requirement of the German microlight category and still have enough capacity to be a useful aircraft. At the time a lot of microlight manufacturers were chasing a cruise speed of 160 knots.” Unlike the U.S. Light Sport category, German microlight regulations do not specify a speed limit and do not prohibit constant-speed props or retractable gear. “I thought the excellent aerodynamics of the RV, combined with the power of the Rotax 915 iS, might make that possible without having to use expensive composites or retractable landing gear. So in the late summer of 2019 I ordered a complete RV-4 kit.”
Building Quickly
COVID hit just as the RV-4 kit was delivered and, with a lot of time suddenly on his hands, Robert completed the basic airframe in just nine months. The airplane was pure Van’s from the firewall aft, with just a couple of exceptions. Robert found that Beringer wheels and brakes (made in Europe) were slightly lighter than the stock units in the kit, so he substituted those. A couple of minor modifications were made just forward of the canopy to accommodate the (required by German regulations) ballistic parachute.

A ballistic chute—possibly the first ever installed in an RV-4—lives under the forward fuselage cover (left). The straps attaching the chute to the rear spar fitting are routed beneath an extended intersection fairing (right).

The parachute is a good example of Robert’s careful thought. It may seem strange to think that adding the weight of a parachute actually helps to build a very light RV-4. But just forward of the windscreen, the RV-4 has a removable panel. It opens to a bay originally designed to provide access to the back of “steam” instruments, some of which could be 12 or 13 inches long. The new glass displays extend only an inch or two behind the panel, and Robert was able to fit the chute and its propelling rocket into the remaining space. The attaching cables were connected to the engine mount and to the rear spar/fuselage attachment. The rear cables were run inside the cowling, then outside the fuselage to the wing. An extension of the fiberglass gear leg cuff covers the cable and makes the installation all but invisible. Keeping the parachute in this forward position meant the lighter engine did not have to move nearly so far forward to maintain the designed CG, which meant that added fuselage side area and weight could be kept to a minimum.

Rotax has managed a commendably compact engine package, but even so, fitting a turbocharger, intercooler, oil cooler, computer boxes, gear reduction drive, wiring harnesses, fluid lines, cooling ducts and…oh, yeah…a four-cylinder engine inside the firewall profile of an RV-4 was a tricky job. The photos show just how carefully every item had to be considered.

The Rotax cowling is not a one-off. Robert made production molds so he could provide parts to others.

Because the installed weight of the Rotax 915 iS is about 90 pounds less than a typical O-320 installation, an extended engine mount was required.

With the longer mount built and the engine installed, a new cowl was fabricated. That’s one sentence, but it represents many hours of work, making a positive plug, then making solid negative molds to lay up the glass cloth and epoxy. No less than ten air inlets were needed to cool the coolant radiator, oil cooler, turbocharger, turbo intercooler, cylinder bases and electronic “stuff.”

In the cockpit things are much simpler. A single lever controls power. Engine management—fuel flow, ignition timing, etc.—is controlled by the Rotax EMU. Optimum rpm is determined by a box from RS Flight Systems. This unit, increasingly seen in European Rotax-powered airplanes, uses several data points delivered by the ECU to determine the desired rpm and controls the standard hydraulic governor with an electric servo.

The installed cowl, before paint. In the end the cowl needed to be lengthened just 10 inches to make the CG balance out.
You Pays Your Money…
With any aviation engine today, there is always the nasty question of money. You might expect that a complex European engine like the Rotax would be expensive: You wouldn’t be wrong. The list price for a 915 iS in the U.S. is $43,000 and change.
(If you need 10 more horsepower, the newly released Rotax 916 iS, with identical weight and size specs, will set you back about $50,000.) But if you think the traditional American engine is less expensive, think again. Van’s Aircraft has a long-established OEM agreement with Lycoming and sells factory-new engines for the best prices around…if you are building an RV. A new IO-320 with dual electronic ignition and an exhaust system lists for $43,750. None of these prices include shipping nor do they include the myriad of bits that are required to make the engine actually fly. Lycoming’s TBO is 2000 hours while the 915 iS’s is 1200 hours. You can get a good food fight going over the relative merits of a fast-turning, gear-reduced, fairly complex, computer-controlled engine designed in the 21st century versus a slow-turning direct-drive engine that’s about as complex as a stone ax and has its design roots in an era where computers were people with pencils and big erasers. In the end, you pays your money and you takes your choice.

The RV-4 was displayed at the Aero show in Friedrichshafen, Germany (left). The unpainted airplane, with a constant-speed prop, weighs a little over 800 pounds (right)!
How Does It Fly?
After all the challenging work of building the airframe and fitting the unique engine was done, the airplane was ready to fly. Unpainted and tanks empty, it weighed just 814 pounds, making it very possibly the lightest RV-4 ever built…lighter than many RV-3s.

“I was concerned that adding forward fuselage area might upset the RV control harmony, especially in yaw,” Robert said. “I worked very carefully and in the end I had to lengthen the cowl just 10 inches to make the CG balance out. With the more pointed cowl, the added side area is not that much. Still, it is not nothing, so I was anxious to see if it made a difference in flying qualities. I am happy to say it flies beautifully.

“I have flown over 50 hours and my worries about yaw stability seem to have been unnecessary. I have flown spin tests and the airplane recovers quickly and normally—I must mention though that I have never spun a Lycoming RV-4 so I can’t say if my RV-4/600 is different. The climb performance is better than with the O-320. True airspeeds at altitude are higher too, courtesy of the Rotax turbo…high enough that I must reduce power to remain under the Vne limit, starting at about 12,000 feet.”
Using an (almost) all-glass panel also saved weight. The backup round gauges are required by German rules.

So, can you, too, build and enjoy an RV-4/600? It is increasingly possible. Now that Robert has the molds for the cowl and the jig for the welded engine mount, he intends to make those parts available. He notes that “while it will take longer to build an RV-4 than other RVs because the kit is not prepunched, it should not take longer to build an RV-4/600 than a stock RV-4.” According to the “Hobbs Meter” on Van’s website, 1452 RV-4s have been built, so any RV-4/600 builder will be following a well-trodden path, at least as far as building the airframe is concerned.

And what about those “other RVs”? Well, Rotax has always intended the 915/916 series as direct competition for the Lycoming O-320/360, so their engines should work well in any RV intended for 150/160 hp. In fact, they are already flying. An RV-7 with a 915 iS is flying in Argentina and for some time experiments have been underway in Florida with an RV-9A powered by a similar engine. With its longer wing, the RV-9 and the turbo’d engine might be a particularly happy match. (How about the RV-8? The author has flown RV-8s with five different engines, ranging from 160 hp to 220+. My favorite, hands down, was a very light RV-8 with an O-320 swinging a metal constant-speed prop. The thought of that airplane weighing 120 pounds less is positively exciting…) An inverted oil system is under development that will enable aerobatic pilots to take full advantage of the lighter engine.
Aloft in a unique RV-4.

The whirring sound of the turbocharged Rotax is still unusual at American airports, but that may be changing more quickly than anyone envisioned. Builders like Robert Haag have given us a look at what’s possible with a modern internal combustion engine, engineering skill and good craftsmanship. At least until practical electric propulsion becomes possible, it might be the way forward.


 

Curt Lewis