Aviation week amp amp space technology november

DOUBLE ISSUE

RICH MEDIA EXCLUSIVE

A New Generation Of Avionics

ZHUHAI AIRSHOW PREVIEW

RICH MEDIA EXCLUSIVE

Antares Launch Failure

$14.95 NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AVIATION WEEK & S PA C E T E C H N O LO G Y

CHINA’S CHALLENGER Comac’s Plan for C919 Rollout, First Flight

A Penton® Publication

Pratt & Whitney.

The shortest distance to profitable operation is your direct line to Pratt & Whitney services.

Call us. We respond. With lower costs and uncompromising service. Innovative parts repair instead of replacement, when it’s the best option. A broad portfolio of services and innovations, right where – and when – you need them. Take a look at today’s Pratt & Whitney services at pw.utc.com/DependableServices. Providing dependable services and customer-focused value.

Dependable Services

DOUBLE ISSUE

EDITION

STARTS AFTER PAGE 38

$14.95 NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AVIATIONWEEK & S PA C E T E C H N O LO G Y

GROWTH TARGETS

Filling MRO Needs In Asia PAGE MRO15

CAPACITY CAUTION U.S. Airlines’ Plans for 2015 PAGE 39

CHINA’S CHALLENGER Comac’s Plan for C919 Rollout, First Flight PAGE 52

CHASING ‘NO FAULT FOUND’ Target: Rogue Avionics PAGE MRO22

A Penton® Publication

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & S PA C E T E C H N O L O G Y

Editor-In-Chief Joseph C. Anselmo Executive Editor James R. Asker Managing Editors Jen DiMascio, Jens Flottau, Graham Warwick Assistant Managing Editor Michael Stearns Art Director Lisa Caputo Director, Digital Content Strategy Rupa Haria DEFENSE, SPACE AND SECURITY Editors Jen DiMascio (Managing Editor), Jeferson Morris (Associate Managing Editor), Michael Bruno, Amy Butler, Michael Fabey, Sean Meade, Frank Morring, Jr., Bill Sweetman (Chief Editor, Defense Technology Edition)

Dual Snap®

Pressure, Temperature & Liquid Flow Switches & Sensors

Time-Tested. Cost-Effective.

When It Absolutely Has To Work.

CIVIL AVIATION/MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND OVERHAUL Editors Jens Flottau (Managing Editor), Madhu Unnikrishnan (Associate Managing Editor), Sean Broderick, Cathy Buyck, John Croft, William Garvey, Fred George, Rupa Haria, Kerry Lynch, Guy Norris, Bradley Perrett, Jessica Salerno, Adrian Schofield, Brian Sumers, Lee Ann Tegtmeier (Chief Editor, MRO Edition), Jeremy Torr Chief Aircraft Evaluation Editor Fred George For individual e-mail addresses, telephone numbers and more, go to www.AviationWeek.com/editors

EDITORIAL OFFICES 1166 Ave of Americas, New York, N.Y. 10036 Phone: +1 (212) 204-4200

BUREAUS AUCKLAND 53 Staincross St., Green Bay, Auckland 0604, New Zealand Phone: +64 (27) 578-7544 Bureau Chief Adrian Schofield

RTD Sensors

Pressure Transducers

Multi-Function Temperature & Pressure Sensors

BEIJING D-1601, A6 Jianguo Menwai Ave., Chaoyang, Beijing 100022, China Phone: +86 (186) 0002-4422 Bureau Chief Bradley Perrett BRUSSELS Rue de L’Aqueduc 134, 1050 Brussels, Belgium Phone: +32 (2) 648-7774 Bureau Chief Cathy Buyck CHICAGO 330 N. Wabash Ave., Suite 2300, Chicago, Ill. Phone: +1 (312) 840-8445 Bureau Chief Lee Ann Tegtmeier COLUMBIA, S.C. 1120 Bafn Road, Columbia, S.C. 29212 Phone: +1 (803) 727-0309 Managing Editor, AviationWeek.com Sean Meade FRANKFURT Am Muhlberg 39, 61348 Bad Homburg, Germany Phone: +69 (69) 2999-2718 Fax: +49 (6172) 671-9791 Bureau Chief Jens Flottau

CCS manufactures original aircraft parts for Comac, Avic, Gulfstream, and numerous other aviation aircraft around the world.

www.ccsdualsnap.com

LONDON 50 Broadway London SW1H0RG, England Phone: +44 (207) 152-4521 Bureau Chief Tony Osborne LOS ANGELES 10 Whitewood Way, Irvine, Calif. 92612 Phone: +1 (949) 387-7253 Bureau Chief Guy Norris MOSCOW Box 127, Moscow, 119048, Russia Phone: +7 (495) 626-5356; Fax: +7 (495) 933-0297 Contributing Editor Maxim Pyadushkin NEW DELHI Flat #223, Samachar Apartments, Mayur Vihar—Phase-1 (ext.), New Delhi 110091, India Phone: +91 (98) 1154-7145 Contributing Editor Jay Menon PARIS 40 rue Courcelles, 75008 Paris, France Phone: +33 (06) 72-27-05-49 Bureau Chief Amy Svitak Contributing Editor Pierre Sparaco pierre.sparaco@orange.fr SAN FRANCISCO 271 Coleridge St. San Francisco, Calif. 94110 Phone: +1 (415) 314-9056 Bureau Chief Madhu Unnikrishnan SINGAPORE 5 Changi Village Road, # 03-2059, Singapore, 500005 Phone: +65 9145 8459 Bureau Chief Jeremy Torr WASHINGTON 1911 Fort Myer Drive, Suite 600 Arlington, Va. 22209 Phone: +1 (703) 997-0333 Bureau Chief James R. Asker Administrator of Bureaus Kyla Clark Art Department Scott Marshall, Colin Throm Copy Editors Andrea Hollowell, Patricia Parmalee Director, Editorial and Online Production Michael O. Lavitt Production Editors Elizabeth Campochiaro, Bridget Horan, Ellen Pugatch Contributing Photographer Joseph Pries

PENTON David Kieselstein Chief Executive Ofcer Warren N. Bimblick Senior Vice President, Strategy and Business Development Nicola Allais Chief Financial Ofcer/Executive Vice President Gregory Hamilton President, Aviation Week

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 3

November 3/10, 2014

Winner 2013

Contents

Volume 176 Number 39

AVIATION WEEK & S PA C E T E C H N O L O G Y

Digital Extras Tap this icon in articles in the digital edition of AW&ST for exclusive features. If you have not signed up to receive your digital subscription, go to ow.ly/AkXJo 10-12 14 16-18 19 20 22 23 24 25 71 72 73

Feedback Who’s Where The World Up Front Leading Edge Reality Check Airline Intel In Orbit Washington Outlook Classified Contact Us Aerospace Calendar

THE WORLD

16 Antares rocket explosion may have its most profound reverberations on Orbital-ATK deal on Wall Street

18 Initial operating capability for F-35 B and C likely to slip due to modifications and lack of maintainers

SPACE

26 Contingency planning, multi-vehicle approach to supplying ISS will mitigate efects of the Antares explosion

28 Boeing begins assembling first test CST-100 as SpaceX readies for key Dragon pad abort evaluation

DEFENSE

29 Think-tank report recommends adoption of UCAS family and larger role for the Long-Range Strike Bomber

29

The U.S. Air Force’s secret Northrop Grumman RQ-180 is one of the most important systems in the Pentagon’s emerging “Third Ofset” strategy.

31 France under enormous pressure to reduce its deficit, even as the military takes on new commitments

32 France looking forward to delivery of its third MQ-9 Reaper UAS in early 2015, eyes MALE in 2025

34 Brazilian contract for 36 Gripens is a turning point in the fighter’s history and secures its long-term future

35 Raytheon funding a seeker upgrade to the Tomahawk missile to extend its life into the 2030s

36 Aegis system moving missile agency closer to proving airborne IR sensors can cue a target intercept

38 Boeing restructuring KC-46 internal milestones to stay on target for first delivery in 2017

AIR TRANSPORT

39 Lower fuel prices boost U.S. airline profits, but carriers remain wary about growing capacity

40 As Air France and Lufthansa strive to cut costs, strikes inflict major pain and the demand outlook worsens

40 Qantas says it has climbed back to profitability, while rival Virgin Australia remains firmly in the red

NEXT-GENERATION AVIONICS

42 Early customer evaluations are part of Honeywell’s design process that focuses on the ‘user experience’

44 Genesys has new strategy to bolster its market share for integrated cockpits in large Part 25 aircraft

ON THE COVERS This week, Aviation Week publishes two editions. On the lefthand cover, the first C919 flight-test aircraft is in final assembly in Comac in this photo by Xu Bingnan. A report updating development of the new jet leads of a series of articles on Chinese aerospace in advance of next week’s Airshow China in Zhuhai (page 52). Also in both editions are a special report on cutting-edge avionics (page 42) and a report (page 26) and editorial (page 74) on last week’s Antares rocket launch failure. The cover of our MRO edition shows a Tigerair artist concept.

4 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

geaviation.com

Data-driven fuel decisions should start with better data.

GE’s Fuel Management offering collects highly accurate flight and operational data and applies advanced, patented analytics to help customers reduce fuel use and improve overall fleet efficiency.

Get started at geaviation.com/fuelmanagement.

Imagination at work.

Airbus Widebody Family

25% lower fuel costs with no compromise on comfort The A350 XWB is the only all-new aircraft in the 300-400 seat category. Scheduled to enter commercial service later this year, the A350 XWB will set a new standard of comfort and efďŹ ciency in its class, with 25% lower fuel consumption compared to existing aircraft. It will also bring a new level of passenger comfort, with more personal space and 18-inch wide seats in economy. The A350 XWB has the exibility to embrace growing passenger numbers.

Airbus Widebody Family, our numbers will convince you.

airbus.com

Š AIRBUS, 2014. All rights reserved. Airbus, its logo and the product names are registered trademarks.

COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT UPDATE

52 46 Seamless situational awareness highlights suite of new software Honeywell is building for its flight decks

48 Universal Avionics about to certify

a new flight deck that tightens the pilot-machine working relationship

50 Touchscreens slowly becoming

standard in modern cockpit design, but not for primary displays

ZHUHAI 2014

56 Avic and partners should move into detail design of the Xian MA700 turboprop by middle of next year

57 Past few months have seen first flights of a pair of significantly diferent J-20s from prototype

EDITORIAL

74 Space can become efcient and

safe if we realize that it will require hard work and experimentation

aerospace provider from satellites to precision-guided munitions

62 Chinese industry introducing family

54 Six years after its reorganization,

63 China making little progress

diversified Avic still faces big challenges due to sheer size

and production plans for existing and planned commercial aircraft

60 China emerging as one-stop military

52 Comac plans to roll out the C919

in less than a year and is trying to prepare for first flight in late 2015

64 Program profiles update status

of launchers that should be more efcient and more cost-efective

in opening its skies to fixed-wing general aviation

24

On the Web

A roundup of what you’re reading on AviationWeek.com

Will Air France go the way of Pan Am? There is no evidence to suggest any imminent demise, but as our Dec. 16, 1991, cover story discussed, it took two decades for Pan Am to slowly decline and fail. It is a lesson worth remembering. Editor-in-Chief Joe Anselmo takes a look back in our From the Archives blog: ow.ly/Du9T7

MRO ASIA, ZHUHAI AIRSHOW

Our editors will be reporting from the Aviation Week MRO conference and exhibition in Singapore Nov. 4-6, and Airshow China in Zhuhai Nov. 11-16.

Keep up with the latest on AviationWeek.com

ANTARES ACCIDENT – READER REACTIONS Kevinreedy55: “Failures while pushing the testing envelope are normal and not indicative of any change in broader policy. NASA has had more than its share of failures in its non-commercial efforts.”

READER COMMENT

Roktmn: “Reminds me of my early days developing rockets.

Somehow I wouldn’t have expected such a thing today but when dealing with machines you never know. These particular rocket engines have plagued the Russians and now us, resulting in test stand failures and launch failures that are reminiscent of the early days of rocket development.”

Our photographer captured a very dramatic sequence of the explosion of an Orbital Sciences Antares rocket shortly after liftof on Oct. 28. See the photos at AviationWeek.com/Antares and read our editors’ analysis of what happened, on page 26.

CHRIS SIMUNDSEN/AW&ST

8 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

George Zip: “Sad news for OSC [Orbital Sciences], but maybe this and August’s SpaceX failure will silence those facile commentators who have been claiming that we are at the point where NASA can be completely defunded in favor of commercial launch providers. There is no substitute for experience in this business, and the path to development of a reliable launcher can be a long and painful one.”

AviationWeek.com/awst

THINK LAW ENFORCEMENT Airbus Helicopters equips the best police pilots with an elite range of homeland security helicopters. Serving communities for protection, surveillance and interception duties. Outpacing criminals and patrolling the highways.

Issue an EC145 T2.

Feedback ROBOTS IN THE COCKPIT For the last several issues, Aviation Week has devoted substantial space on the Viewpoint and Feedback pages to pilot pay. Perhaps the long-term answer is unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).

Robots don’t need pensions, bathroom breaks or sleep, nor do they need to adjust their income for inflation.

Robotic control systems can be placed nearly anywhere on a large aircraft, allowing more seats to be squeezed in and a much better view from first class (surely increasing the ticket price and bottom line).

A really good pilot may truly be one-of-a-kind and, occasionally, a hero.

A really good robot may not be a hero, but it can be exactly duplicated with 1,500 hr. of flight training pre-installed.

Chris Mann AUSTIN, TEXAS

PILOT SHORTAGE MYTH With regard to William Swelbar’s recent Viewpoint: “Yes, There Is a Pilot Shortage” (AW&ST Oct. 6, p. 58), yet another business advocate has followed a textbook for a master of business administration course and drawn the wrong conclusion. The mythology of a pilot shortage, or an engineer shortage, or any shortage in a STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) field flies in the face of the first, most basic economic law: If there is a shortage in anything, demand rises, and with it, price.

In a true labor shortage, demand in all of those fields would spike and wages would rise significantly. However, wages have stagnated in real terms for a couple of decades.

In fact, the opposite of a shortage is apparent. There is always an oversupply of aspiring young people who dream of being pilots. Regional carriers can get away with ofering obscenely low wages by telling pilots: “Hey, if you don’t like it, I have 100 other eager applicants.”

Of course, there are some distortions, such as arcane government subsidies and union contracts, but at the core, these would not change the bottom line—wages would have been rising above inflation.

The only true shortage we have is of technically competent workers and pilots who refuse to work for wages far below what their training and experience merit. The cry of “pilot shortage” is little more than crying wolf in an attempt to help keep wages down.

Chris Manzuk STANWOOD, WASHINGTON

COMPUTING TRUE COSTS Readers Craig Kronfeld and Robert Steven (AW&ST Oct. 20, p. 10) should look at any airline annual report to understand the reality of running an airline. They would see that the bottom-line profit margin is low; labor and fuel are by far the biggest costs.

Even if regional carriers were to pay executives nothing and spread the money out to the pilots, the incremental increase in pilot pay would be negligible: There are far more pilots than executives. Fuel is essentially an uncontrollable cost. Only labor can be controlled to a limited degree.

The real culprit is the flying public.

If we were willing to pay more, wages would rise.

We all have a budget, whether “we” are airlines, employees, or customers.

When it comes to leisure travel, I have deferred a trip, or else have driven to a major hub, to save money. I suspect this is true for most people. Until we pay higher fares, airline wages will be low.

Rick Cunnington ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA

NEXT-GEN FIGHTER CONCERNS I read with some trepidation Dave Majumdar’s “Separate Ways” (AW&ST Oct. 13, p. 28) regarding the U.S. Air Force’s and Navy’s pursuit of

10 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

the next-generation fighter programs.

As a taxpayer I am concerned this may be a Congress-industrial complexinitiated move to build a $500-millionper-copy fighter that will bust its budget and come in five years late. Does anyone remember the F-35 or the F-111?

The latter was a failed one-size-fits-all solution for the Navy and Air Force. At least some saner minds prevailed in the 1970s and produced the F-16 and the F/A-18 or we would still be flying F-4s.

I am appalled at the gross incompetence and avarice of our aviation industry and government. Are there any patriots left in that business?

Michael J. Flaherty LEESBURG, VIRGINIA

OPEN-MINDED MH370 SEARCH “Little Clues” (AW&ST Oct. 20, p. 34) provides a good summary of the recent reanalysis of the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappearance. But I am puzzled as to why the satellite data analysis has been taken as gospel. I do not doubt the talents of the Immarsat team; however, it seems that they and other investigators are looking from the nominal satellite and airplane side of the equation—not the out-of-thebox first-principles thinking that is warranted in an “unknown-unknown” mystery such as this.

Some types of questions to ask: Since the Burst Timing Ofset aircraft terminal bias value is key to the arc location, is it really stable in a variable bus power and temperature scenario? (fire can cause soft and hard shorts and reboots, and there are so many more anomalies). Take a similar unit and test it (if necessary with its flightpower supply) on the ground, and then again on an airborne testbed.

Also, credible theories for the mid-flight Burst Frequency Ofset (a Doppler measure) were not covered, and these may help narrow down the scenario space.

An approach of working backward from other (admittedly small) leads may also yield alternative locations.

Assuming the underwater acoustic arc is valid, what would have to happen in the satellite data assumptions to fit that?

AviationWeek.com/awst

Feedback I applaud the Independent Group in trying to work with the limited public information to sanity-check the investigation. They should be encouraged.

Kenneth H. Friberg PORTLAND, OREGON

ROCKY ROAD FOR ROCKET ENGINES Viewpoint writer Daniel Goure may have good reason to look to 2015 as the year of “The Great Rocket Engine Competition” (AW&ST Oct. 20, p. 58).

Given past experience, the U.S. Air Force may be facing a year of protests, stop-work orders and delays in 2016.

John C. Bauer MANOTICK, ONTARIO

NOISE TAKES CENTER STAGE I was pleased to see several articles devoted to airframe noise (AW&ST Sept. 22, pp. 46-52). In the late 1960s and early ’70s I worked for the thenLockheed-California Co. Although

SUNTEC Singapore

NOVEMBER 17, 18, 19 2014 Country of Honor

SINGAPORE

The only platform connecting all the value FKDLQ LQ DVLD SDFLðF

Aviation Week & Space Technology welcomes the opinions of its readers on issues raised in the magazine. Address letters to the Executive Editor, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 1911 Fort Myer Drive, Suite 600, Arlington, Va. 22209. Fax to (202) 383-2346 or send via e-mail to: awstletters@aviationweek.com Letters should be shorter than 200 words, and you must give a genuine identification, address and daytime telephone number. We will not print anonymous letters, but names will be withheld. We reserve the right to edit letters.

assigned to the acoustics department, most of my projects came from the advanced design organization.

One of the most rewarding was being the acoustics principal engineer on a Defense Department contract for designing an ultra-quiet reconnaissance airplane. Of all the possible noise sources that had to be predicted, only “Airframe Noise,” as we called it, had no established prediction methodology.

Several measurement programs using aircraft operating under “idle or near idle” power were measured, but none unpowered, although later, Davey Smith at Wright-Patterson AFB conducted research on a glider.

The Defense Department funded the external noise measurement program.

We measured five diferent aircraft— all flying unpowered. As a direct result, the course of external aircraft noise regulations were forever changed.

The program is reported in a NASA paper—CR2377, December 1974.

Gerald J. Healy ELOY, ARIZONA

PUT ‘EARS’ AT RUNWAY ENDS

Get your free access badge online at: wwZ MHFDVLD EDGJHV FRP

MAlN TOPlCS Aeronautics Oil & Gas

“Taming Noise” take two pages to address excessive aerodynamic noise produced by components of flaps and leading edges during the takeof phase. I have lived under the flightpath of Wichita Mid-Continent Airport Runway 32 for 46 years. The greatest noise created during takeof is from the clatter of the hydraulic pumps while raising their flaps, and from leadingedge devices during the climb out. As a flight heads northwest, the noise drops to a slight hum of the engines.

A switch to electric motor power for the flaps, leading-edge devices and landing gears might be more productive.

I recommend that the NASA engineers position themselves 2 mi. from the runway end at a commercial airport and listen to takeofs and approaches to figure out what is making the most noise.

William J. Schueler WICHITA, KANSAS

12 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

EVO 1412

® = reg. trademark of BASF SE

We create chemistry that makes high flyers love low costs.

BASF is a leading supplier of fuel performance packages worldwide. Kerojet® aviation fuel additives can help reduce the costs of maintenance, improve effciency and sustain the high performance of aviation gas turbines. Our additives improve the environmental footprint for the airlines, reduce waste and improve the health and safety for maintenance crews: BASF’s aviation fuel additives offer the potential to reduce the need for expensive and time consuming tank draining procedures, biocide treatments and can reduce the risk of ice forming in the fuel systems of aircrafts. In a nutshell: Kerojet® solutions save airlines time and money.

When high fyers love low costs, that’s because at BASF, we create chemistry.

Contact us: jetfuel-additives@basf.com Visit us: www.basf.com/fuel-lubricant-solutions

Who’s Where

M

argus Rahuoja has been appointed the European Commission’s director of aviation and international transport afairs. He is head of cabinet for EC Vice President Siim Kallas.

Keith Slotter has been named vice president-security and Kevin Crissey director of investor relations for JetBlue Airways. Slotter was head of staf security for Bridgewater Associates, Westport, Connecticut, and had been chief of the Financial Crimes Section of the FBI. Crissey was founder/CEO of Skyline Research and had been a senior equity research analyst at UBS Investment Bank.

Capt. Haitham Misto (see photo) has become acting president/CEO of Royal Jordanian Airlines. He was head of flight operations.

Axel Theis, CEO of Munich-based Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty, has been appointed to the Allianz SE board of management with responsibility for the global industrial insurance, credit insurance and insurance businesses in Ireland and Great Britain. He succeeds Clement B. Booth, who is retiring from Allianz. CFO Chris Fischer Hirs follows Theis and will, in turn, be succeeded by Nina Klingspor, who has been head of the CEO Ofce for Allianz SE. Andrew Hunter has been named director of the Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group and senior fellow with the International Security Program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. He has been director of the Joint Rapid Acquisition Cell at the Defense Department and had been chief of staf to the undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics.

Tony Marceddo has become head of Northrop Grumman Australia’s M5 Network Security. He was an executive with Raytheon Australia and is a veteran of the intelligence and security fields of the Australia Defense Department.

Andy Miller (see photo) has been appointed outreach program manager for aviation at the University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh. He has been an aviation educator, primarily for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Foundation Air Safety Institute in Frederick, Maryland, as well as several state aviation bureaus.

Matt Tuohy has been named director of Jacksonville (Florida) Univer-

To submit information for the Who’s Where column, send Word or attached text files (no PDFs) and photos to: stearns@aviationweek.com For additional information on companies and individuals listed in this column, please refer to the Aviation Week Intelligence Network at AviationWeek.com/awin For information on ordering, telephone U.S.: +1 (866) 857-0148 or +1 (515) 237-3682 outside the U.S.

sity’s Davis Aviation Center. The Haitham Misto retired U.S. Navy captain was director of managed solutions, and veterans program lead with Incepture.

Keith Ruggirello has been appointed vice president of the Institute of Technology presentAircraft Management Div. of ed the award. Tracy was recKey Air, Oxford, Connecticut. He Andy Miller ognized for contributions over was a regional executive with a sustained period to technical Universal Weather & Aviation. and engineering excellence in USAF Maj. Gen. John T. the aerospace industry and for Shanahan has been appointed leadership in advanced aerocommander of the 25th Air Force space structural and material of Air Combat Command, Joint technologies for commercial Base San Antonio-Lackland, aviation, defense programs and Texas. He was commander of the Ken Collyer space systems.

Air Force Intelligence, SurveilKen Collyer (see photos), lance and Reconnaissance (ISR) director of rotary-wing and Agency at the base. Brig. Gen. (seunmanned aerial systems eleclect) Peter J. Lambert has been tronic-warfare (EW) business named vice commander of the development, and Dominic 25th Air Force. He has been vice DiDomenico, an advisory syscommander of the ISR Agency. tems engineer in the non-kinetMaj. Gen. Michael A. Keltz has ic system engineering departbeen appointed commander of D. DiDomenico ment, both for the Northrop the 19th Air Force of Air EduGrumman Corp., were honored at the cation and Training Command, Joint recent Annual Association of Old Crows Base San Antonio-Randolph. He was International Symposium and Conventhe command’s director of intelligence, operations and nuclear integration. Keltz tion. Collyer received the Stanley B. Hall Business Development Award, will be succeeded by Brig. Gen. John which recognizes performance in leadA. Cherrey, who has been its deputy ing a government team that gains funddirector for intelligence, operations and ing approval for a new EW program or nuclear integration for flight training. leads an industry team that captures a competitive award of a new EW proHONORS AND ELECTIONS gram. He is engaged in advancing U.S. Capt. Tim Canoll, a Delta Air Lines Navy large-aircraft infrared counterMD-88 captain, has been elected presimeasure programs; helping to identify dent of the Air Line Pilots Association. He and implement solutions to replace the succeeds Capt. Lee Moak, who did not U.S. Marine Corps EA-6 Prowler; idenseek reelection. Canoll has been executifying lower-cost, more-capable U.S. tive administrator since 2011 and has held positions on the ALPA Delta Master Army EW solutions; and supporting identification of EW payloads for U.S. Executive Council and national committees. Capt. Joe DePete, a FedEx Express Air Force unmanned aerial vehicles.

DiDomenico received the Clark G. FiesAirbus A300 pilot, was elected first vice ter Research and Development Award, president. Reelected were Capt. Bill which recognizes achievement in the Couette, an Embraer ERJ 145 pilot for research and development of new EW Envoy, as vice president–administracapabilities. He is credited with leading tion/secretary; and Capt. W. Randolph development of the Ofce of Naval ReHelling, a Delta Airbus A320 pilot, as search’s Integrated Topside Advanced vice president–finance/treasurer.

Development Model program. It uses John Tracy, who is Boeing’s chief a common, modular, open and scalable technology ofcer and engineering hardware and software approach to leader, has won the 2014 International perform EW and information functions, Von Karman Wings Award. The Aeroand employs line-of-sight communicaspace Historical Society and Graduate tions for shipboard applications. c Aerospace Laboratories of the California

14 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

“

“Pilots love this airplane for its quietness and superb handling characteristics… its larger flight deck makes pilots feel more comfortable, especially on long routes.”

“Boeing offers great support for the 787, making its operation smoother and smoother.”

”

Captain Pu Ming VP of Operations Hainan Airlines

THE DREAMLINER EFFECT. HAINAN AIRLINES SUCCESS. www.newairplane.com/787/dreamliner-effect

The World DEFENSE Power Deal

The Pentagon’s latest pact for 48 F135s from Pratt & Whitney for the singleengine F-35 program will cost $1.05 billion, according to U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, program executive ofcer for the F-35. This is 4.5% lower than for the previous lot, he says. The Pentagon announced the deal on Oct. 30 as a $793 million modification to an earlier contract. “Pratt & Whitney has shown a commitment to getting back on the ‘war on cost’ curve,” Bogdan said.

Rockets from V-22

Bell Helicopter is to carry out live-fire trials of guided rockets from the V-22 Osprey later this month. The self-funded program, will see the company’s Osprey testbed launch guided. rockets from a single pod mounted on the starboard forward fuselage of the tiltrotor, at the Yuma Proving Grounds, Arizona.

Forward-firing weapon capabilities for the V-22 are of particular interest to Air Force Special Operations Command.

Slovakia Orders C-27Js

The Slovakian government has ordered a pair of AleniaAermacchi C-27J Spartan airlifters as part of the modernization of the country’s air

force. The type will replace aging Antonov An-26s. The first Slovak C-27 is scheduled to be delivered in 2016, and the second in 2017.

NATS and Thales Win Deal

Aquila, a consortium of Thales and air navigation service provider National Air Trafc Services has secured a 22year £1.5 billion ($2.4 billion) contract to modernize air trafc management services at military airfields operated by the U.K. Defense Ministry. The project will fit new workstations and equip-

For more breaking news, go to AviationWeek.com

Antares Blast Rocks Orbital-ATK Deal

The Antares rocket explosion over a Virginia launch pad last week may yet have its most profound reverberations on Wall Street next month. That is because shareholders of rocket provider Orbital Sciences Corp. and Alliant TechSystems are scheduled to vote Dec. 9 on the companies’ April proposals to split up ATK and merge its aerospace side under Orbital.

The $5 billion merger was hailed by fnancial analysts as a long-overdue consolidation and natural alignment in the space-access sector. Engineers and government customers, meanwhile, sensed a quicker solution to the Russian-born AJ-26 engine. But all of it was based on expected fnancial results, starting with revenue from NASA, which now could be called into question by the Antares loss (see page 26).

According to analysts, Orbital could pay “millions of dollars” just to investigate the failure, let alone repair the Wallops Island launch pad and even more to speed an AJ-26 replacement.

While losses from the accident should be covered by Orbital’s insurance, any new spending and future questions over Orbital’s reliability standing with NASA could impinge growth.

Orbital Chairman and CEO David Thompson said last week the planned merger and respective Orbital and ATK shareholder votes had not been affected. “As far as I know, things will continue.” Launch failures do not trigger anything in the merger terms, he noted, and those involved already understand the business risk of a failure.

But the Antares failure also comes amid lawsuits and intellectual property-theft charges in Orbital’s supply chain, as well as diminishing enthusiasm among ATK shareholders as that company’s gun-oriented business confronts fears over a downturn in the sport-shooting market. After the “unfortunate failure” of Antares, ATK said it “is conducting a thorough evaluation of any potential implications,” including the merger.

Wall Street expects it to proceed. “We’ve always liked the strategic logic of the Orbital deal,” RBC Capital Markets analysts said. “But regardless of the merger, we see ATK proceeding with two publicly traded companies given their distinct end-market dynamics.” ment into air trafc control towers, as well as new airfield radar systems and navigation aids with work beginning in April 2015, prioritizing on new radio systems. £400 million will be spent on new equipment.

Russia Upgrades ASW Helos

The Russian navy plans to enhance its antisubmarine warfare (ASW) capability by upgrading about 50 of its Kamov Ka27PL (Helix-A) antisubmarine rotorcraft fleet after the trials of the modernized Ka-27M version are completed this fall.

The major advantage of the upgraded variant is that it is equipped with the new Kopye-AA radar designed by Moscow-based Phazottron-NIIR. It will replace the aging Osminog search-andsighting system. With the Kopye-AA, the Ka-27M can operate 100-150 km (62-94 mi.) from its ship at an altitude of 4-5 km. The new radar also provides a 360-deg. observation range of 200 km.

Kopye-AA is a tactical command system that enables the helicopter to have full situational awareness and send data about the situations and targets to a command post on a combat ship or on shore, explains Phazotron-NIIR Chief Designer Yury Guskov. The new radar also can detect and track airborne targets, but the main task remains surveillance of underwater targets.

16 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

SPACE GSAT-16 Launch On Deck

India’s next national communication satellite, GSAT-16, is scheduled to be launched in December to augment its communications capability and boost existing services. The 3,150-kg (3.5ton) satellite will be dual-manifested on a European Ariane 5 rocket along with another satellite, DirecTV-14, says a senior scientist at the Indian Space Research Organization. The liftof of GSAT-16, initially slated for next year, has been advanced by six months to meet the rapidly growing demand for GSAT services. The GSAT-16 satellite is expected to replace Insat-3E as the primary Indian communication satellite orbiting the Earth.

BUSINESS Boeing Debt Rated High

In nearly identical afrmations last week, both Standard and Poor’s Ratings Services and Moody’s Investors Service assigned “A” and “A2” ratings, respectively, to Boeing’s upcoming $850 million debt issuance. The rating agencies gave high-ranking credit scores to Boeing’s unsecured notes despite a newly forecast softening in so-called free cash flow, which could pinch near-term AviationWeek.com/awst

OUR VISION, REFLECTED

CLOSE TO HOME Beyond groundbreaking color, PPG delivers service at jet-speed through a global network like no other.

To expedite product delivery and bring technical resources closer to our aviation customers, PPG offers global capability from 16 regional Application Support Centers (ASCs) around the world. Besides providing direct access to our marketleading coatings, sealants, and transparencies, ASCs offer rapid-response services such as color matching and blending, window systems assembly, chemical management, and value-added packaging for PPG coatings, sealants, and materials supplied by customers. What else does proximity enable? For one, the arrival of pre-mixed frozen sealants and customized sealant solutions that reduce process time and waste—technicians thaw only what’s needed.

Visit ppginnovation.com/closetohome to learn how innovation at PPG is helping our aviation customers.

Scan to learn more.

The PPG Logo is a registered trademark and Bringing innovation to the surface is a trademark of PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. © 2014 PPG Industries, Inc. All rights reserved.

The World F-35 IOC Dates Likely To Slip

It is growing more likely that July 1, 2015, will not mark the initial operational capability (IOC) declaration for the F-35B desired by the U.S. Marine Corps, according to Pentagon procurement chief Frank Kendall. Also in jeopardy is the U.S. Air Force’s ability to declare its F-35A operational by Aug. 1, 2016, due to an impending shortfall in maintainers to repair the single-engine, stealthy jet.

“It is going to be hard to hold to the July date,” Kendall tells Aviation Week. “I am pretty confdent we can meet the threshold by the end of the year. And we will make it as close to July as we can.”

Pentagon offcials have stuck adamantly to the IOC plans outlined in May 2013 to quell vocal skeptics targeting the $400 billion program after its many cost overruns. The Marines have planned an “objective” IOC for July 1, 2015, with a “threshold” date in December 2015.

“There has been a sequence of separate pieces of the IOC effort that have moved out as late as October 2015, and to date we have been able to create effciencies in the process that have pulled the timeline back to 1 July,” says Capt. Dustin Pratico, a Marine Corps spokesman.

Pratico says the current risk assessment for achieving the needed aircraft modifcations and training workpoint to a mid-August IOC. “This is not the farthest overshoot we have seen and today we have a much better handle on what is required to manage the timeline,” returns to shareholders and investors. A revised cash-flow forecast came as part of Boeing latest quarterly report Oct. 22, spurring stock traders to push down the share price a few percentage points. But Boeing’s overall market-leading position as a transport aircraft maker, weapons provider and well-run business make up for negative efects, according to raters.

Boeing plans to issue the notes in three tranches: $250 million in floating-rate notes due 2017, $300 million in fixed-rate notes due 2021 and $300 million in fixedrate notes due 2024. Proceeds will go to general corporate purposes, including funding Boeing Capital.

he says. Marine IOC includes the frst squadron, VMFA-121, with 10-16 F-35Bs and enough trained pilots and maintenance offcials to deploy for war. The frst F-35B unit is slated for its initial deployment in 2017 to MCAS Iwakuni, Japan.

Work to modify all of the IOC jets to the same warfghting confguration and testing for the 2B software are considered the culprits for the potential slip.

Meanwhile, the Air Force’s in-service date is in jeopardy owing to diffculty in fnding enough experienced personnel to undergo the F-35 maintainer training regimen in time for the Aug. 1, 2016, target. Roughly 1,100 maintainers are expected to be needed, 80% experienced. And most of those personnel were to be drawn from the A-10 program. But Congress has resisted the Air Force’s plans to retire its A-10s by 2019.

Without congressional action to retire some of the A-10s—freeing up maintainers for the F-35—the service would have to risk readiness and draw technicians from legacy programs and/or understaff the F-35 enterprise. Both options amount to a slip in IOC readiness, an Air Force offcial says. Further confounding the ability to draw maintainers from other programs are ongoing operations in Syria and Iraq against Islamic State targets. Already a plan to move roughly 300 maintainers from the B-1 program to F-35 this coming spring has been put on hold to prioritize readiness for the bomber in foreign operations..

with companies that provide both advice and products such as weapons.

Cobham Work Up Down Under Cobham’s new 12-year, $563 million contract to provide an airborne searchand-rescue capability for Australia should add 1% to the British-based company’s top line, RBC Capital Markets analysts said Oct. 24 after the deal

Engility Buys Tasc

Engility and Tasc announced Oct. 28 that they will merge in a $1.1 billion stock-and-debt deal, creating an expanded and diversified engineering services company for U.S. government customers. After the deal closes, which is expected in January, Engility’s overall defense market concentration will fall to 48% from 64%, with 28% of total business stemming from intelligence agencies and the last 24% from the Homeland Security Department, FAA and NASA combined. The deal marks a turnaround for systems engineering and technical assistance business units, which were discarded by many defense prime contractors around 2010 as the Obama administration acted on growing concerns over conflicts of interest

was unveiled. The Australian Maritime Safety Authority’s contract, which begins in 2016 and could be extended through 15 years for more money, calls for Cobham to buy, equip and support four Bombardier Challenger CL-604 special mission jets geared for search and rescue over land and at sea, based in Cairns, Melbourne and Perth.

“These aircraft will be . . . fitted with new-generation sensors, high-vision windows and air-operable doors for aerial delivery of lifesaving equipment,” the company said.

18 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

UTC Looking Better

Moody's Investors Service has reaffirmed its ratings for United Technologies, including the company's relatively high debt ratings, and has lifted its overall grade of the company to “stable” from “negative.” “The rating actions reflect broad-based improvement in the company’s credit profile since its near-fully debt-financed acquisition of Goodrich Corp. in [July] 2012,” said Russell Solomon, Moody’s lead analyst for United Technologies.

The company added nearly $20 billion of debt to acquire Goodrich at a “relatively high multiple,” or premium, but thanks to cash generated from asset sales or retained versus automatically turning it over to shareholders, United Technologies has repaid about $9 billion, according to the rating agency.

Correction: In a recent Up Front column (Oct. 13, p. 16), Richard Aboulafia misattributed a quote to Boeing Senior Vice President Tim Keating. The comment was made by Ray Goforth, executive director of the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace.

Correction: An article in the Oct. 27 issue (page 14) should have stated that the Terrafugia Transition, on the road, will deliver 35 mpg. at highway speeds.

AviationWeek.com/awst

Up Front COMMENTARY

When Musk Meets Disney

SpaceX’s recipe for success comes straight out of Walt Disney’s playbook

S

paceX’s recently won $2.6 billion contract to supply NASA with a crew transport capsule is a major milestone.

SpaceX will become the first private company to launch astronauts into space, 12 years after its creation and six years after being on the brink of collapse. This is a remarkable turnaround and achievement.

What is even more remarkable is that founder Elon Musk seems to be as successful in all his other businesses, be it Tesla or SolarCity, implying he may have found a miracle recipe to break through markets where incumbents— be they defense and space conglomerates, car manufacturers or energy companies—have traditionally crushed potentially disruptive entrants.

So what could this miracle recipe be?

Years ago, I was a consultant to a European startup that wanted to revive the old Zeppelin’s rigid airship design on a large scale for multiple applications, from freight transport to luxury passenger cruises. At first glance, the idea was appealing, to bring back to life a proven technology to offer an environment-friendly, safe, economical and versatile mode of transportation that could help alleviate road and airport congestion in the busiest parts of Europe. Yet the venture never took of beyond preliminary studies.

In hindsight, four main reasons stand out: lack of resources, lack of talent, no “system approach” and no “dream” to connect with. Just reverse those causes for failure and you possibly have Elon Musk’s recipe for success. The first two, while obvious, are not easy to get.

Not everybody has lots of cash to start a company and the charisma and selfconfidence to attract top talent.

The third one relates to the theory of disruptive innovation: As a new entrant, it is extremely hard to disrupt AviationWeek.com/awst

Walt Disney (left) and NASA rocket designer Wernher von Braun, seen in 1954, collaborated on educational films about space exploration. an industry like space or road transportation without creating a whole new ecosystem of your own, simply because there are too many vested interests in the existing one. No established space player wants to hear it is possible to reduce the price of launchers by 75%. It is better to keep pushing incremental innovations within the same business model. Musk understood and therefore created his own ecosystem, designing his own rocket, vertically integrating his design and production, and acquiring his own test range.

Finally the fourth success factor: having a dream to connect to and, as important, a process to bridge the gap between

By Antoine Gelain Contributing columnist Antoine Gelain is the managing director of Paragon European Partners. He is based in London.

the dream and reality. In that respect, Musk’s approach strikes me as similar to one used by another great creator and businessman of his time: Walt Disney.

He embodied the ability to create stunning products and a highly successful business by starting with a dream and then applying a systematic and powerful creative process (“storyboarding”) to make this dream a reality.

One of the major elements of Disney’s unique genius was his ability to explore things from three diferent perspectives—the dreamer’s, the realist’s and the spoiler’s—and to build a storyboard by exploiting each perspective iteratively. Musk seems to have been doing just that.

The dreamer asks “why not?” and sets the dream goal. Why not save humanity by extending its footprint to other planets? Let’s send humans to Mars.

The realist asks “how?” How can we send humans to Mars repeatedly and economically? By having reusable space vehicles, which can reduce the cost of spaceflight by two orders of magnitude.

The spoiler asks “yes, but . . . what about?” What about Newton’s third law or Tsiolkovsky’s equation that tell us the room for improving a rocket’s payload fraction is extremely limited?

What about the huge financial resources needed along the way to achieve the necessary technological breakthroughs?

How can we keep the cash flowing in? By going where the space money is: satellite launches and transport to the ISS. This ability to take these diferent perspectives goes a long way toward explaining Walt Disney’s success. As one of his animators noted, “. . . there were actually three diferent Walts: the dreamer, the realist and the spoiler.

You never knew which one was coming into your meeting.” I suspect there are also three Elons, and that whenever he enters a meeting, no one knows which one is coming either.

So while connecting the entertainment world with the space industry may seem far-fetched, when it comes to great achievements, the application matters less than the spirit with which one approaches the challenge. In that respect, Musk could well make Disney’s welcoming words his own: “Here you leave today, and enter the world of yesterday, tomorrow and fantasy.” c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 19

Leading Edge

COMMENTARY

Package Deal How recipients react could help determine whether self-flying package delivery works

T

he biggest challenge to the plans of Amazon, Google and others to deliver packages directly to customers using unmanned aircraft may be the recipients themselves, including their unfortunate tendency to reach up to grab packages while they are still attached to the aircraft.

The man who launched and led Google’s Project Wing for its first two years thinks package delivery by unmanned aircraft “absolutely is going to happen,” but has revealed some of the challenges identified by the search giant in its research and development efort.

“The biggest challenge for precision delivery is going to be the user,” says Nick Roy, a professor who took a sabbatical from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to start the project, including conducting real-life delivery trials in August on a farm in Australia.

Challenges to be overcome before package delivery by unmanned aerial systems (UAS) can become a reality include issues of air-vehicle safety and reliability, customer privacy, neighborhood noise, wind turbulence and even the possibility of packages being stolen.

Project Wing was established within the Google X “Moonshot” organization to wrestle with “hard problems that could change the world,” Roy said in October at a Washington conference organized by the American Helicopter Society International.

Roy says Google X likens the problems it tackles to “a toothbrush— something we face at least twice a day.” Other projects include developing self-driving cars and airborne

GOOGLE

platforms to deliver Internet access to the two-thirds of the world that lacks connectivity.

The problem being addressed by Project Wing is that transmission of information has been revolutionized while movement of physical objects is largely unchanged. “Self-flying vehicles can be the next-generation platform for rapid and safe delivery on demand,” he notes.

Specifically, Google wants to “allow anybody to ship anything to anywhere at any time,” Roy says. “Our focus is on speed. That’s the attraction of an air vehicle. It’s not same-minute delivery, but we want to fly as quickly as we can over an urban environment. That is the problem we are tackling.”

Google evaluated a range of fixedand rotary-wing configurations for its prototype before selecting a hybrid design (see photo) that takes of and lands vertically as a tailsitter and transitions to a flying wing for cruise. Small multicopters could not carry the desired

20 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

By Graham Warwick Managing Editor-Technology Graham Warwick blogs at: AviationWeek.com warwick@aviationweek.com

payload or fly fast enough, he says.

One lesson learned is that “physical appearance tends to impact on the public impression” of UAS, because of the association with armed drones, so a non-threatening design is needed, says Roy, who has returned to MIT but continues to consult on Project Wing.

Google decided to winch the payload down from the hovering vehicle after looking at, and rejecting, the idea of dropping it ballistically. “It was surprisingly hard to insulate it from the shock, and the user experience was horrible,” he says.

Landing the vehicle, although looking preferable, also was rejected.

“The user experience is terrible. It is hard to stop people reaching for the vehicle,” Roy observes. In tests, users were likely to grab the package before release up to 60% of the time.

Research showed it was feasible to deliver packages in urban environments using information already collected for Google Earth. Analysis of Mountain View, California, looking for a 2-meter (6.5-ft.) gap to land the payload 5 meters from the customer’s doorstep, showed 90% of houses could be covered.

But available databases do not capture obstacles such as power lines strung across streets, or trees that change with time. “Unless we have the capability to update them in real time, UAS will have to have onboard sensors to detect obstacles,” explains Roy. Wind in urban environments is another challenge, with buildings shedding vortices that result in complicated flowfields below rooftop level.

“We can model buildings to know where vortices are and avoid flying or delivering there. We can build windfield models to fold into planning.”

Delivery UAS “will need to handle wind speeds up to 20 kt. if we want to cover 90% of addresses in the U.S., but vehicles consume more power in higher winds, and wear and tear on lithium polymer batteries will be an issue,” Roy says.

Noise will be a concern, particularly for neighbors of customers receiving deliveries. “It is less about decibels and pure sound energy and more about quality. Certain types of noise are objectionable. We don’t have answers yet,” he adds. c AviationWeek.com/awst

Maximizing your vision is our vision.

At Rockwell Collins, we’re always looking forward – and so are our solutions. Like the predictive features of our new MultiScan ThreatTrack™ weather radar, helping you anticipate threats of turbulence, lightning and hail, before they happen. Or our head-up guidance systems (HGS™) that combine synthetic and wide-spectrum infrared vision to make whiteout conditions appear clear as day. And even the head-worn technologies that provide unprecedented situational awareness to military aircraft pilots via fused sensor imagery. All to help you see the right information at the right time, every time.

rockwellcollins.com/maximizingvision

Reality Check

By Pierre Sparaco Former Paris Bureau Chief Pierre Sparaco has covered aviation and aerospace since the 1960s.

COMMENTARY

One Model May Fit All Low-cost, legacy carriers move toward same business model, on both sides of Atlantic

A

re low-cost carriers approaching a critical turning point?

Southwest Airlines’ executives have the answer: According to some airline analysts, the Texas-based leader is no longer the lowest-cost player in the market, although it remains, by far, America’s largest domestic carrier. In other words, it may have reached the extreme limits of its economic model.

Ryanair understands the market is rapidly changing. Ofering low prices is no longer enough; assigned seat allocation is needed, and bags—checked or not—should be carried for free. Such requirements call for a revised economic model and will soon be unavoidable.

Ryanair recently inaugurated routes to Brussels Zaventem, the “true” Brussels airport, in an indication that remote provincial airports are no longer an operational necessity to maintain direct operating costs at their lowest.

Ryanair also is envisioning longhaul services and could buy as many as 40 Airbus A330s or Boeing 787s to launch transatlantic routes. However, no short-term deliveries could be arranged, a situation that doesn’t match O’Leary’s impatience. Similarly, Southwest, for the first time, is beginning

EasyJet, Europe’s second-largest low-cost airline, has taken a large share of the French domestic market.

EASYJET

This is not only an issue in the U.S.; Southwest has inspired dozens of low-cost airlines worldwide, including Europe’s big and influential players Ryanair and EasyJet. Ryanair Chief Executive Michael O’Leary has acknowledged on several occasions that Southwest did not just provide inspiration, since he copied the Texas company’s cost structure and operational methods. If Southwest is no longer the model and gradually evolves into a more conventional player, imitators may follow a similar track and, in the long run, face serious difculties.

What happened? There is nothing wrong with Southwest. It has been able to maintain a pure-player, low-cost model despite its impressive growth (it now carries nearly 110 million passengers per year) and its expanding route system that comprises about 100 destinations. The low-cost “spirit” of founder Herb Kelleher is still alive and well, and a new generation of executives is carrying on with it.

But after deregulation, the legacy carriers gradually adapted to a new

competitive era and became more efficient. Payrolls were cut, lean structures replaced outdated management methods based on a distant past—when the airline industry still was somewhat elitist—and marketing became much more efcient. Today majors such as Delta Air Lines, United Airlines and American Airlines are considerably better of than in the past, certainly thanks to competition from Southwest and its disciples.

Other rivals—discount or ultra-budget players—are also showing the way, including JetBlue, Allegiant and Spirit.

They are being carefully monitored in Europe and raising questions about that market’s growth potential, and the need to adapt to the traveling public’s changing expectations. But if low fares remain the holy grail, passengers are also increasingly reluctant to travel to airports in the middle of nowhere, after a 60-minute-plus bus ride. They want to use main airports and dispute Ryanair’s revised geography: Brussels South Airport should be called Charleroi, its real location, 60 km (37 mi.) from Brussels.

22 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

to serve destinations outside the U.S., perhaps the only way to grow given a mature home market.

The aviation world has dramatically changed in the last few years. It is no longer purely theoretical to wonder if low-cost carriers and legacy airlines will apply a unified economic model.

This seems to be the logical conclusion of a long-lasting debate, the converging cost structure of main players confirming that this is the trend. In the end, it looks like one model will fit all.

Meanwhile, Europe’s airline industry has more reasons to be worried. Its legacy majors, such as Air FranceKLM and the Lufthansa group, have been too slow in adapting to the new environment. The Franco-Dutch group’s short-haul route system is seriously endangered by the low-cost carriers’ unrestrained growth, their rapidly increasing market share and overall dynamism. EasyJet is now France’s second-largest domestic airline and other competitors, such as Volotea, are harboring big ambitions.

In the end, Air France’s domestic route system could vanish, and such a failure would weaken its hub-andspoke strategy. And it already may be too late for the legacy airlines to launch a successful counterattack. c AviationWeek.com/awst

Airline Intel

By Jens Flottau Managing Editor for Civil Aviation Jens Flottau blogs at: AviationWeek.com/thingswithwings

Jens.flottau@aviationweek..com

COMMENTARY

Leveling the Playing Field Europe’s airlines often complain about state support for competitors, but they are very good at taking advantage of it themselves

T

here seems to be something of a strange trend in the airline industry. Earlier this year, the members of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) met in Doha/Qatar for their annual meeting. And now, in October, the Association of European Airlines (AEA) came together in Istanbul for its annual meeting. Qatar Airways and Turkish Airlines are of course among those airlines that inflict the most pain on what used to be the established legacy airlines. Meeting in your worst enemy’s home town has become a theme this year.

This theme, of course, sends some messages.

One of them is that Gulf carriers and fast-growing challengers like Turkish are an integral part of the industry.

Another message is: Why can’t all governments support airlines as generously as those in Qatar, Turkey or the United Arab Emirates?

Why do ours have to make life so difcult?

But that is about it in terms of common ground. The question of how to deal with the threat from the Middle East remains unanswered.

Germany is sending some very awkward aeropolitical messages these days that serve as an illustration. Only a few weeks ago, German civil aviation authority LBA told Etihad Airways that it will no longer be allowed to code-share on 34 of the 60 Air Berlin flights that are operated with dual AB and EY flight numbers. This has affected the important Abu Dhabi-Berlin route, the lifeline of the partnership, and many routes beyond Berlin. LBA AviationWeek.com/awst

FLUG HAFEN MUENCHEN GMBH

told Etihad the code-shares were illegal because the bilateral air service agreement between the UAE and Germany did not include them. But the authority had approved the services six times in the past three years.

An added protocol to the bilateral allows Etihad (and Emirates) to fly to four points in Germany and serve “three additional points limited to code-share services only in the Federal Republic of Germany.” All parties so far have interpreted that sentence as meaning that Etihad can put its code on Air Berlin services to Abu Dhabi

from three more German destinations. But LBA suddenly changed its mind and argued the sentence means code-sharing only to three points on domestic routes within Germany.

Of course nobody will ever publicly admit what really happened. But multiple sources in the industry talk about massive lobbying by Lufthansa and Condor in an efort to halt Etihad’s own expansion and its financial support for Air Berlin, in which it owns a 29.2% stake. Those that claim Gulf carriers benefit from massive government support in multiple ways managed to force not only a reinterpretation of the bilateral but also immediate action by authorities: The ban would have been efective at the end of October. At the last moment, LBA changed its mind again and approved the code-sharing for the coming winter, but still insists that the flights are not covered by the bilateral.

Needless to say that in past cases where Lufthansa code-sharing services were of doubtful legality, LBA and the ministry simply started renegotiating the bilaterals until the deals became fully legal, and in the meantime it was business as usual.

It is not quite true that European governments never support their airlines. In fact, in some cases they act more protectionistically than one might expect, even though AEA CEO Athar Hussein Khan says he is “sick and tired” of Europe being called protectionist when he sees it as “the only fully liberalized aviation market.” European airlines are not shy when it comes to taking advantage of state support. In the Air Berlin case, help was political, but the many recent airline state aid approvals by the European Commission show that often real money is involved.

State support in whatever form—like it or not—is a fact of life in the airline industry. In the Gulf region, in Europe or elsewhere. It will not go away.

Lufthansa’s CEO Carsten Spohr believes introducing WTO-type rules in air transport would help level the playing field and bilaterals should remain the primary tools to manage market access. It seems that the German government has listened very carefully.

And by the way, the next AEA annual meeting takes place in Brussels. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 23

In Orbit COMMENTARY

Preparing for The Long Haul Additive manufacturing in space is set to begin on the ISS next month MADE IN SPACE

F

irst they have to get rid of the mice. Right now the Microgravity Science Glovebox on the International Space Station is occupied by a rodent experiment. When the ISS crew finishes with it in mid-November, the way will be clear for the first space-based manufacturing in history, a trail-blazing experiment that may someday help human explorers make their way to Mars.

After the astronauts have installed a special 3-D printer in the glovebox, and set up the high-definition video cameras that will watch its extruder and work platform from two diferent angles, controllers at a small startup company in the research park at Mofett Field, California, will send signals to begin making things in orbit.

The first test articles will be simple plastic coupons preloaded into the system’s memory. Those will give engineers at Made In Space, the company that built the microwave-size printer, and at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, data on how well the system performs in the full-time microgravity environment uniquely available on the space station.

SpaceX delivered the gear on its latest resupply mission to the station, and will return the samples via an ocean splashdown on the next Dragon capsule to make the trip, probably early next year. After those are examined on the ground, the In-Space Manufacturing Project will get to work on the real job: making things the station crew can use.

“We’re developing a catalog of all the diferent ways that we can print things that will be helpful, whether

it be payload parts or ancillary hardware, cubesat components,” says Niki Werkheiser, the NASA project manager.

“It will continue to grow. There’s a clip on exercise equipment that often breaks. There’s an Eclss [environmental control and life support system] filter extraction cap. There’s ancillary hardware that supports the rodent research, sample containers.”

The on-board manufacturing is a classic example of how NASA is using the space station to test the hardware it must develop for deep-space human exploration. In a sense, the station is the perfect analog for a Mars mission.

It has continuous microgravity, which mimics the gravity loads crews and their equipment will experience en route to and from the red planet, and its mass and pressurized volume match what a crew is likely to need to survive the trip.

Even though it has pressurized volume equivalent to a Boeing 747’s, that isn’t enough room for all the parts that are likely to fail during a three-year voyage. It doesn’t even have room for the feedstock that would be needed to keep an additive-manufacturing unit running that long. So Werkheiser’s

24 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

By Frank Morring, Jr. Senior Editor Frank Morring, Jr., blogs at: AviationWeek.com/onspace morring@aviationweek.com

team already is planning a follow-on test unit that will recycle the parts and tools it makes once they break or are no longer needed. Among early questions to be answered is how often feedstock can be reused in space before the material itself wears out. And the only place to find an answer with the kind of certainty that is needed for deep space exploration is on the space station.

“We can build big vacuum chambers and use pumps to take the atmosphere out of those chambers, so we can simulate the lack of atmosphere in space,” says Jefrey Sheehy, senior technologist in NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate, which is funding the $5 million additive-manufacturing work.

“We can heat things up; we can cool things down, but what we can’t do for more than 30 sec. on an airplane flight that goes over a big steep parabola and puts you in free fall briefly is recreate the microgravity environment.”

Made In Space engineers flew their printer through 400 parabolas on NASA’s “Vomit Comet” (see photo), but that doesn’t come close to the checkout it will get on the ISS. At a Technology Exposition organized by the Marshall center, engineers and scientists who are using the space station to wring out the hardware that will be needed to go to deep space cited case after case of problems that only cropped up after their hardware was in space and running for a while.

Robyn Gatens, the systems and technology demonstration manager in the ISS Division at agency headquarters, listed two potential show-stoppers that turned up in the Eclss systems.

The bone calcium astronauts lose along with the gravity loads bones normally work against goes into their urine and then gums up the complex recycling gear NASA is testing on the station to help close the water-supply loop. And the absorbent beads in the carbondioxide removal beds produce more dust in space than they did in ground tests, which clogs air filters and other life-support gear.

“It’s priceless,” says Werkheiser, when asked what the ISS’s “legacy” will be. “There’s no other way we can test, in a microgravity environment . . . how to live, work, operate on a daily basis.

That’s what station is about.” c AviationWeek.com/awst

Washington Outlook COMMENTARY

Mending Fences Will McCain’s plainspoken ways suit him in a leadership role?

I

REUTERS/LANDOV FILE PHOTO

f Republicans win control of the Senate in the Nov. 4 congressional elections, the outspoken Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is likely to head the Senate Armed Services Committee. While he is generally well-respected in national security circles, the defense industry remembers his aggressive pursuit of Boeing’s Air Force refueling tanker missteps and his criticism of the Joint Strike Fighter and Littoral Combat Ship.

In fact, McCain has scored little in the way of campaign donations from industry in his last two elections. So if he takes control of the committee, it will be interesting to see if his bulldog reputation remains intact, or if he reaches out more to businesses.

He worked well alongside outgoing chairman Sen. Carl Levin (DMich.) but may now also face bruised feelings within the committee that once prided itself on bipartisanship.

While recently campaigning in New Hampshire, for former Massachusetts Republican Sen. Scott Brown, McCain launched an unusual attack at a fellow member of the armed services committee, calling New Hampshire’s sitting senator, Jeanne Shaheen (D), not a “serious member. . . . I don’t see her at very many of the hearings. I’ve not seen her propose any amendments or proposals that have to do with national security,” he said, according to NHJournal.com. c

BROADCASTING DISCONTENT General aviation advocates are asking the FAA to rethink a requirement for all aircraft to be equipped with part of the surveillance component of Nextgen air trafc modernization by Jan. 1, 2020. The system, known as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast-Out, remains too costly for many general aviation aircraft owners, says Mark BakAviationWeek.com/awst

‘I don’t see her at very many of the hearings.’

—SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, of fellow Sen. Jeanne Shaheen

er, president of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, in an Oct. 28 letter to FAA Administrator Michael Huerta.

“Installing equipment that costs a minimum of $5,000-6,000 is simply beyond their reach,” Baker writes, referring to the 43% of the general aviation fleet valued at $40,000 or less. Private aircraft owners cannot pass along the charge of equipping their aircraft to passengers.

Instead, Baker suggests looking for lower-cost technology. Many “afordable portable solutions can provide ADS-BIn information to the cockpit,” he writes, adding that similar solutions could meet FAA ADS-B-Out requirements. c

POLICY PITCH After more than a decade at the helm of the European Space Agency (ESA), Jean-Jacques Dordain has an idea for how the spacefaring nations of the world should cooperate in exploring and exploiting the Solar System and

Edited by Jen DiMascio Managing Editor-Defense, Space & Security Jen DiMascio blogs at: AviationWeek.com/ares jennifer.dimascio@aviationweek.com

beyond. It looks a lot like ESA. In a keynote address at the 26th Wernher von Braun Memorial Dinner in Huntsville, Alabama, Dordain—who is set to retire next year—outlined seven “principles” for international cooperation in space.

Based on his experience as the directorgeneral of the 22-nation ESA, Dordain says nations should work together for peaceful purposes, with transparency, keeping exploration activities open to all partners able to commit resources.

Results of space research should be shared, he says, as should space-transportation systems and other infrastructure. Cooperating nations should allocate a part of their space capacity to “students and young scientists of the world,” and international partnerships should include private entities as well as governments. “These seven principles look like ESA, ESA to a global scale,” he says. “These are my personal remarks. But for me it is urgent to move.” He concedes that an “architect” is needed to provide overall guidance.

That role logically falls to Washington, given U.S. history in space exploration.

“You should take the initiative,” he tells industry and government players in his mostly American audience. c

MISSED UNDERSTANDING Congressional agreement on the fiscal 2016 defense budget is not likely until next spring—perhaps as part of a larger debate over the expiration of the Treasury’s debt ceiling and whether to return to across-the-board budget reductions, says the Pentagon’s top budget ofcial. But since the start of the deficit reduction push in 2011, the Pentagon has received funding at levels somewhat less than the president has requested and more than spending caps stipulate, Comptroller Mike McCord says.

The Pentagon spends a lot of time trying to explain the military’s financial pressures. But he wonders, wryly, if perhaps Congress comprehends the situation all too well. “We’ve been led to believe . . . that we don’t explain the problem well enough, and that is why there hasn’t been a consensus in Congress to make a real definitive move away from the [Budget Control Act],” McCord says. “I’m not sure that is the case.” c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 25

SPACE

Antares Setback

Launch failure strains NASA’s new ISS resupply approach—without breaking it Frank Morring, Jr. Huntsville, Alabama, Amy Svitak Paris, Mark Carreau Houston and Guy Norris Los Angeles

C

ontingency planning and the multi-vehicle approach to supplying the International Space Station will mitigate the effects of the worst accident to hit human spaceflight since the Columbia disaster, but not without some belt-tightening and lesson-learning in the months ahead.

No one was hurt in the Oct. 28 failure of the fourth Orbital Sciences Corp. Antares launch vehicle carrying ISS cargo shortly after it cleared the tower at its launch facility at Wallops Island, Virgina. The launch was delayed by a day because a sailboat was in the of-shore keep-out zone on Oct. 27. The vehicle failed shortly after liftoff and fell almost straight back to Earth, erupting in a massive fireball in the vicinity of its state-owned launch pad.

Damage assessment was hampered at first by burning solid propellant from the vehicle’s upper stage and potential danger from the toxic hypergolic propellants on board. Based on a “cursory look” by the incident response team at NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility and video shot the morning after the sundown launch attempt, the most serious damage afecting future flight probably fell on the transporter erector that raises the vehicle from horizontal to vertical, and the pad’s lighting suppression rods.

“[I]t will take many more weeks to further understand and analyze the full extent of the efects of the event,” NASA stated. “A number of support buildings in the immediate area have broken windows and imploded doors.

A sounding rocket launcher adjacent to the pad, and buildings nearest the pad, sufered the most severe damage.”

“It looks fairly okay,” says William Gerstenmaier, associate administrator for human exploration and operations. “The details are going to come out later, and we’ll figure out what needs to be done.”

Ofcials from NASA and Orbital, one of two companies hired to deliver food, hardware and scientific experiments to the ISS, say the complex systems of tanks and plumbing that deliver liquid oxygen and kerosene to the vehicle on the nearby pad during fueling were holding pressure the day after the failure, but burning solid propellant apparently damaged plumbing and wiring on the structure itself.

26 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

An Orbital failure-review team—with NASA participants—will replay telemetry and study the debris in an efort to learn the cause of the failure and plan a fix. Testing the fix will be hampered by the pad damage, since Orbital uses the pad itself instead of a separate stand for static tests of the Antares.

The company also runs hot-fire acceptance tests of its Russian-built AJ-26 engines it flies in pairs on the Antares at Stennis Space Center, Mississippi.

In May one of the refurbished surplus engines, some of them 40 years old, suffered “significant damage” in a failure at Stennis. Gerstenmaier says a review found that engine “essentially exploded” after a “high-temperature event” in the oxygen turbine section, but he stressed on Oct. 29 that it was much too soon to implicate the engines in the previous day’s launch failure.

“It’s an extensively tested engine,” said Frank Culbertson, executive vice president and general manager of advanced programs at Orbital, in a press conference the night of the failure. “It is very robust and rugged, and it goes through extensive testing by a team at Stennis Space Center before it’s ever installed on the rocket. These engines were taken through the normal acceptance testing, and pressure testing, et cetera, both at Stennis and here at Wallops prior to the launch, so we didn’t see any anomalies or anything that would indicate there were problems with the engine.”

The failed launch also was the first with an upper stage based on the solid-fuel ATK Castor 30XL, an upgrade from the original Castor 30 designed to increase vehicle performance for an expanded Cygnus cargo carrier.

With a dwindling supply of the engines, Orbital has been seeking a replacement for the core stage of Antares, which, along with the Cygnus, is AviationWeek.com/awst

expected to deliver 20,000 kg (44,000 lb.) of supplies and experiments to the space station under a $1.9 billion commercial resupply services (CRS) contract with NASA. Orbital CEO David Thompson says that under the company’s original plan, it expected to spend roughly two years reengining the Antares core stage.

“I certainly think we can shorten that interval, but at this point I don’t know how much,” he said in an Oct. 29 conference call with Wall Street analysts.

In the meantime, Thompson says, the company remains on track to submit a bid under NASA’s follow-on CRS contract due next month. And he suggests the mishap could be a blessing in disguise as the potential to accelerate reengining could attract new business.

Possibilities for a replacement include restarting Russian production of the NK-33, which Aerojet Rocketdyne would continue to modify for Antares and potentially other customers; a solid-rocket-motor solution proposed

by ATK; a single Russian RD-180 used to power the core stage of the United Launch Alliance (ULA) Atlas 5; and the new Russian RD-193 engine.

Thompson says there is an adequate supply of AJ-26 engines in U.S. inventory to execute the company’s commitment under its initial CRS agreement with NASA, including a recent one-year contract extension that was necessary in order for both Orbital and competitor Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) to meet their obligations.

Orbital built Antares and Cygnus under NASA’s Commercial Orbital AviationWeek.com/awst

Transportation Services (COTS) seedmoney efort to promote development of commercial cargo carriers for the ISS. SpaceX also used COTS funds to help develop its Dragon cargo carrier.

Mike Suffredini, the ISS program manager, says the next Dragon mission is scheduled for Dec. 9. A Russian Progress supply vehicle reached the station early Oct. 29, the night of the failure, so the crew has adequate food and other supplies. Even if no resupply spacecraft reach the station, there are enough supplies on board to last into March.

The lost Cygnus vehicle carried a new nitrogen tank that is part of a nitrogen/oxygen recharging system for the airlock used to support NASAorchestrated spacewalks. The Cygnus was to deliver the first N2 tank, and the upcoming Dragon was to deliver the O2 version. Sufredini says a replacement N2 tank likely will fly aboard the December SpaceX resupply mission, demonstrating the value of the multicarrier approach to station resupply.

Overall the failure cost the station 4,883 lb. of cargo, according to figures supplied by Johnson Space Center. That included 1,602.8 lb. of science experiments and samples, 1,360.3 lb. of food and 1,404.3 lb of vehicle hardware. While the failure was a loss for NASA and Orbital, which Culbertson says carried insurance against payload loss, it also cost at least two commercial companies the small satellites they had intended to launch from the ISS and presented a revenue loss for the company that sold them the station-launch services.

Planet Resources, a startup that

Gallery See the entire sequence of photos of the Antares rocket failure at AviationWeek.com/Antares

hopes to mine asteroids for valuable metals one day, lost its first test spacecraft, the Arkyd 3. And Planet Labs, an Earth-observation data provider that uses cubesat-class spacecraft to provide imagery, lost 26 of its Dove spacecraft, according to Jef Manber, managing director of NanoRacks.

Overall, NanoRacks, which pioneered commercial accommodation on the ISS, lost 29 customer satellites in the failure, and a set of “MixStix” student experiments supplied by 18 school districts.

Manber says the company is working with NASA to arrange passage on a SpaceX mission for as many replacement payloads as will be available.

“We’re not single-point dependent,” Manber says. “It’s not like the old days when, if something [went] wrong, you were down for two years.”

The COTS program that produced the commercial cargo vehicles was started under then-President George W. Bush, at a cost of $500 million. Michael Griffin, who launched the program as NASA administrator, says failure was always an option as the COTS program was set up, and the agency has planned accordingly.

“At the start of COTS, if we had said Orbital Sciences will lose one rocket of the first five it launches, everybody would have said, ‘I’ll take that,’” Griffin said during the Von Braun Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama. “That’s a reasonable percentage for a developmental vehicle. On the SpaceX side of COTS, we haven’t lost a launch yet, although it is inevitable that it will occur. You’re just not going to develop a new capability without experiencing some setbacks.” c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 27

CHRIS SIMUNDSON/AW&ST

When Orbital Sciences’ Antares launch vehicle failed shortly after liftof Oct. 28, it also destroyed a Cygnus commercial carrier loaded with 4,883 lb. of supplies for the ISS. The violent explosion that followed damaged the state-owned launch pad at Wallops Flight Facility, Virgina.

SPACE

Roller Coaster

will have a very flight-like propulsion system as far as everything that goes into the abort, including the avionics, which will be identical to the avionics we are planning for the flight vehicle.”

Following the recent legal uncertainties over CCtCap, Boeing is “back to full-steam ahead,” says Commercial Crew Program Manager John Mulholland. The company completed its first CCtCap milestone—covering the vehicle certification and verification plan—in late October and is moving onto the next milestone concerning critical design review of the Guy Norris Los Angeles ground operations. While so far much of Boeing’s buildup has been via modeling, mockups and analysis, the manufacturer hile the outcome of Sierra Nevada Corp.’s protest is now bringing together parts for the real thing. “We already over NASA’s Commercial Crew program awards have 150 pieces of flight-design hardware out in Florida, and will not be known until January, these two winners we will start assembly of the structural test article (STA) in are accelerating preparations for the next test, development November,” says Mulholland. and demonstration phases of the space capsules that will Although designed at Boeing’s Houston Product Support transport U.S. astronauts to the International Space Station Center in Texas, the CST-100 will be manufactured at the (ISS) starting in 2017.

Commercial Crew Processing Facility, formerly Orbiter The heightened pace will be welcomed by Boeing and Processing Facility-3, at Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), which have been Boeing will make four vehicles initially: One for ground tests, on a roller-coaster ride since their respective CST-100 and and one each for the pad abort test in Dragon V2 capsules were selected by 2016, the first uncrewed flight in early NASA over Sierra Nevada’s Dream 2017, and the first crewed flight to the Chaser lifting body design for ComISS later in 2017. “The big upper- and mercial Crew Transportation Capalower-pressure domes are in the final bility (CCtCap) contracts on Sept. 16. stages of machining at the vendor, as The stop-and-go began 10 days later is the big tunnel assembly, which is when Sierra Nevada filed a protest the interface between the capsule and with the U.S. Government Accountdocking system. So we have got the ability Ofce, citing “inconsistencies three major pieces of hardware in the in the source-selection process.” In final stages of machining and we will response, NASA issued a stop-work finish up assembly of that in spring order to Boeing and SpaceX on Oct. 2015. Then we will get into structural 2, halting the program in its tracks. testing,” Mulholland says.

However, only a week later, NASA Following STA assembly, Boeing rescinded the order, stating that a will start construction of other units delay to the development of the for qualification tests. “The flight detransportation service “poses risks sign service module will be tested at to the ISS crew, jeopardizes conWhite Sands Missile Range in New tinued operation of the ISS, would Mexico, where we will do all the prodelay meeting critical crew size repulsion system qualification tests quirements, and may result in the [abort, orbital maneuvering and reU.S. failing to perform the commitaction control] in 2016. That year we ments it made in its international Boeing’s CST-100 is scheduled for initial will also have the flight-qualification agreements.” Not to be outdone, Si- uncrewed and crewed flights in 2017. flight unit, as well as the pad abort erra Nevada then lodged a petition test which will be out at the missile range on the same site with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington calling as was used by [Lockheed Martin] Orion. We will then be for NASA’s overriding of the stop-work order to be itself overbuilding up the capsule and service module for the orbital turned. Despite Sierra’s protests, however, on Oct. 21, Judge flight tests. So once we get through that structural test article Marian Blank Horn ruled not to “overrule the override.” build, we will be really ramping into simultaneous build on SpaceX, in the meantime, is focused on executing two multiple vehicles,” he adds. key safety flight tests of its Dragon V2 over the next three Boeing acknowledges it faces an aggressive schedule, but months. The first is a pad abort test scheduled for Nosays it is manageable. “If we can come out as planned over the vember from SLC-40A at Cape Canaveral, before the fonext six months, we have a really good chance of meeting all cus shifts to an inflight abort test from Vandenberg AFB the downstream dates,” says Mulholland. Having overcome in California, in January. The test will be conducted using an aero-acoustic design issue that cropped up relatively late “a very flight-like Dragon and the trunk, which will depart in the preceding commercial crew phase, Boeing’s priority is from a truss structure rather than sit on a Falcon 9,” says “obviously to keep a focus on mass. We have margin now but Garrett Reisman, Dragon Rider program manager. The vewe want to keep it,” says Mulholland. “Then there are just hicle will have a crash test dummy inside and a prototype the typical watch items such as finishing the design, releasseat. SpaceX expects initial acceleration loads of 5g to6g ing the drawings and keeping good communications [going] coming of the pad. Speaking at a recent Future In-Space with suppliers.” c Operations Working Group teleconference, he says: “We

Boeing begins assembling first test CST-100 as SpaceX readies for key Dragon pad abort evaluation

W

BOEING CONCEPT

28 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

DEFENSE

Revolutionary Roadmap The U.S.’s air-centered strategy has top-level backing Bill Sweetman Washington

T

could handle double the payload, the report suggests, and have a 12-hr. unrefueled endurance. In a move that is unlikely to get strong support from the fighter community, the Air Force aircraft could be armed with air-to-air missiles for both ofensive and defensive counter-air missions.

Persistence is a key advantage of UAVs, the report notes.

A primary mission for the new UCAS in Third Ofset is a “mobile and relocatable target killer,” using a combination of unrefueled range and tanker support to fly 48-hr.-plus missions and remain on-station beyond the limits of human endurance. The UAVs would be nodes in an aerial communications network that would hedge against an adversary’s counter-space activities—and thereby render anti-satellite operations less valuable. The report also cites an unpublished Northrop Grumman study showing that an unmanned replacement for the F/A-18E/F could save $56 billion over a 25-year service life, compared to a piloted aircraft.

Funding the new N-UCAS and MQ-X could call for “reduction in manned tactical aviation force structure” across all services and “scaled-back procurement of all F-35 variants—including possible cancellation of the F-35C, replaced with advanced Super Hornets and eventually N-UCAS.” In July 2011, during Work’s tenure as deputy Navy secretary, he directed the service to study alternatives to the F-35B/C. The limits on the efectiveness of fighters—including the

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 29

RONNIE OLSTHOORN CONCEPT FOR AW&ST

oday’s U.S. power-projection forces, and those currently planned for the future, will not be able to operate efectively or efciently against anti-access/area-denial (A2AD) weapons and doctrine being developed by China and other adversaries, according to a new report by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) that details a new approach to defense strategy known as Third Ofset.

Instead, the Pentagon should immediately refocus its development eforts on a global surveillance and strike (GSS) system based on long-range, very stealthy aircraft—including the Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) and a new family of unmanned combat air systems (UCAS)—and submarines.

Tactical fighter, surface combatant and heavy landforce programs should be cut back, the report suggests, to pay the bills and rebalance the force.

The CSBA report carries far more weight than usual because it was drafted under the leadership of deputy defense secretary Robert Work (AW&ST March 31, p. 20) and his senior advisers, according to a source directly involved in its production. It is intended to launch a detailed discussion of a major change in national strategy, inside and outside the Pentagon. Author Robert Martinage, a former senior Pentagon ofcial, “can nei- The still-classified Northrop ther confirm nor deny” the extent of Work’s involve- Grumman RQ-180 UAV is thinly disguised in the CSBA ment, he tells Aviation Week.

The CSBA paper details the roles of new and existing report, and will be equipped for systems in the Third Ofset strategy. It recommends a precision-strike and electroniclarger role for the Long-Range Strike Bomber, suggest- attack missions. ing that the program could be “accelerated and expand“semi-stealthy” F-35, so described to discriminate it from ed.” Along with the B-2 and another proposed new weapon, a the wide-band, all-aspect stealth technology of the UAVs and boost-glide missile launched from submarines, it is the only LRS-B—include survivability and their dependence on tanksystem able to deal with hard and deeply buried targets in a ers, which are vulnerable and difcult to protect. Martinage medium- to high-threat environment. According to the paper, concurs with Aviation Week’s assessment of the Chengdu too, it has a stand-in airborne electronic attack capability and J-20 (page 57) as an ofensive counter-air fighter aimed at can perform high-volume precision strike missions. tankers and other air assets. “With an extended-range airThe biggest new program recommended in the report to-air missile the J-20 can push the tanker 800-900 mi. back. is the future UCAS family. Conceptually, Martinage says, [U.S.] fighters can’t even make it to the beach.” this program’s prototype is already flying in the form of the Another unmanned vehicle recommended in the study is a Northrop Grumman X-47B UCAS-D (demonstrator), which “future” stealthy, high-altitude long-endurance UAV. However, could lead directly to a Navy operational aircraft: the CSBA the report notes that only three of the most important new report outlines an N-UCAS with an 8-10-hr. unrefueled enGSS elements are not currently under development (MQ-X, durance and a 3,000-4,000-lb. payload. As a CSBA analyst, N-UCAS and a towed payload module for submarines). The Work was a vigorous proponent of a “high-end” Navy UCAS, so-called future Hale UAV appears, in fact, to be the in-develand his influence has played a part in stalling Navy plans for a opment but secret Northrop Grumman RQ-180 (AW&ST Dec. less capable and less costly solution to the Unmanned Carri9, 2013, p. 20). The report suggests that the RQ-180 has a light er Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike requirement. strike capability, possibly for targets of opportunity.

The CSBA report revives an idea from UCAS-D’s precurAn important caveat is that the Third Ofset still addresses sor program, the Joint UCAS: Because wingspan sets a cap lower-intensity conflicts. As the threat becomes less intense on the payload and range of a carrier-based blended wingand far-reaching, current systems such as tactical fighters body aircraft, a land-based version could benefit from being and permissive-airspace Reaper UAVs should be available. made larger. A U.S. Air Force version, identified as MQ-X,

DEFENSE

F-35A combat radius (600 nm.) from refueling point

A central premise of the CSBA report is that short-range fighters will be excluded from some conflicts by their reliance on vulnerable tankers and adversary development of long-range interceptors.

tend this to be a budget drill.” But as one example, the Northrop Grumman study cited in the report F-22 combat radius suggests that a Navy UCAS force could replace a (410 nm.) from refueling point two-times-larger force of manned aircraft.

Submarine warfare is seen as another area where the U.S. has a substantial and enduring lead. The Third Ofset report advocates improving the fireSafe Tanker Standoff Distance power and flexibility of submarine forces by accelerating the development of unmanned underwater -11 s J 0/ iu vehicles, developing a long-range boost-glide weapon /3 t rad .) ge 7 n -2 a nm ra .)

2 m for submarine launch, and developing towed payload Su omb 00 -1 n c (8 PL (60 modules. The latter could be 3,000-4,000-ton unmanned systems with up to 12 large-diameter launch Andersen AFB tubes, which could be towed into position and remain (Guam) on station for months. Again, there is a price to be Source: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments paid: the scaled-back procurement of large surface combatants of the DDG-51 class.

In the Third Ofset strategy, the use of special operations “The most dangerous cost-imposing strategy is the one we and counterterrorism land forces is favored over large miliimpose on ourselves,” says Center for a New American Setary formations. Ground forces, however, would play a strong curity analyst Ben FitzGerald. “It’s taking out a HiLux truck role in establishing “local area A2AD networks,” particularly with a $500,000 weapon.” But a near-peer threat will be the on the territory of threatened allies. Systems such as landdriving factor. “You can’t lose an advantage versus a near-peer,” based anti-ship cruise missiles linked to aerostat-borne raFitzGerald adds. “You don’t come back from that position.” dars, for example, could both defend coastlines and inhibit Martinage says that the CSBA report does not recommend an adversary’s naval movements. c specific numbers for new systems “because we did not in-

THIRD TIME AROUND T

he proposed new Pentagon strategy is called Third Ofset because it is considered as important as two previous strategic changes that took advantage of U.S. technological leadership to overcome operational challenges: President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s “new look” in the 1950s, which relied on nuclear weapons to ofset Soviet force numbers, and the “ofset strategy” pursued

by Defense Secretary Harold Brown in the late 1970s, which combined precision weapons with new reconnaissance systems to disrupt potential Warsaw Pact aggression in Europe.

Robert Work introduced the term Third Ofset in a speech to the National Defense University in August, and the concept was endorsed by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel a month later, when he announced that he had directed Work to craft a new strategy aimed at countering Russian and Chinese weapon developments.

Third Ofset is based on deterrence, rather than being aimed at restoring the status quo, by driving adversary forces back after a conflict has started. Deterrence takes two forms: “denial,” or preventing the adversary from being confident that his plans will work; and “punishment,” or the ability to damage high-value targets whether or not they are directly used in the conflict.

The CSBA report identifies four specific operational challenges to the classic approach to power projection, which is based on the rapid forward deployment of large air, naval and 30 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

land forces. The challenges result from technology developed by Russia, China and some less-advanced industries.

First, regional bases, including airfields and ports required to keep ships fueled, are vulnerable to attack by guided missiles.

Second, the means to track naval forces at sea, at long range, are becoming more afordable and harder to defeat. Third, nonstealthy aircraft are vulnerable to better air defense systems.

Fourth, space is no longer a sanctuary where surveillance and communications assets can operate unprotected.

Some of these challenges are hard to defeat by traditional means (such as interceptor-based missile defense) because of economics. The report states that the Navy’s SM-3 Block IB interceptor missile costs $10-12 million per round and the new Block IIA twice as much, while China’s DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile is estimated at $5-10 million. Also, each interceptor displaces an ofensive weapon from a ship.

Against those challenges, Third Ofset proposes to exploit the U.S. lead in specific areas where analysts—including Work’s key advisers—believe that it will be hardest for adversaries to develop efective countermeasures. These include unmanned systems; transitioning to autonomous weapons using “machine learning” or artificial intelligence to become more autonomous; long-range air operations; extreme low observables across all bands and aspect angles; undersea warfare of all kinds; and the integration of very large-scale systems of systems. c AviationWeek.com/awst

French forces could lease equipment such as the A400M airlifter or MRTT refueling tanker under a proposed cost-savings plan.

‘Trust Me’ French lawmakers balk at defense ministry plan to shore up 2015 budget shortfall AIRBUS

Amy Svitak Paris

W

ith France under enormous pressure to reduce mounting debt and the nation’s armed forces taking on more operational commitments, lawmakers worry a six-year, €190 billion ($240 billion) military spending plan will collapse if anticipated one-time revenue sources fail to materialize next year.

In October, French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian took sharp questioning from lawmakers—including some strong supporters of defense—over the credibility of his proposed 2015 budget, which upholds President Francois Hollande’s 2013 commitment to spend €31.4 billion on defense next year but relies heavily on sketchy sources of funding.

Those sources, which are needed to fill a €2.1 billion budgetary shortfall in 2015, will be derived from one-time revenue windfalls, including the sale of government assets, as well as mon-

ey that could be available through a public bond issue and the sale of state equity in public companies.

Le Drian said he is confident these sources of cash will come through.

Their timing and the exact amount of funding they will yield are unclear but include revenue expected from a government auction next year of 700-MHz-frequency band spectrum to telecommunications operators.

“We are not sure of the levy from this sale in 2015,” Le Drian said, although he noted that the ministry has surmounted similar challenges in meeting budgetary shortfalls in the recent past, and he is confident 2015 will be no diferent.

“This is the way it was in 2014 and 2013, in terms of one-time revenue gains,” he said. “I am sure these funds will be there in 2015, as they were over the past two years.”

As part of his funding proposal, Le

Drian says the ministry will use a legal tool that allows some of the proceeds from the sale of state assets to establish an outside entity, a public-private company set up with the sole purpose of purchasing defense equipment and leasing it back to the military.

“The solution is to create a project company, and part of the capital would be provided by the state from the proceeds of the sale of government interests,” he said. “The company would buy military equipment and lease it to the state.”

The idea is not new in France, Le Drian says, acknowledging that many questions remain as to the legal regime under which such a company would operate. He says it is not yet clear whether the new entity would be fully or partly private, involve non-French shareholders or be allowed to go into debt. To explore these issues, the ministry recently issued two requests for proposals from consulting firms that would help establish the company’s legal and financial framework, he notes.

By mid-2015, the ministry will have a better idea of available funding from the sale of frequency spectrum and other one-time revenue sources, he says. In addition to offering costsaving benefits to the state, such a scheme could bring the potential for export opportunities as well. “I am

Visit us at MRO Asia 2014 November 4-6 SingEx, Singapore Stand 324

Simplified Sourcing + Lean Logistics Wesco Aircraft and Haas Group International offer comprehensive supply chain management services to the global aerospace industry. We simplify sourcing and implement lean logistics to help customers reduce costs and improve efficiencies.

AviationWeek.com/awst

t One-stop-shop for wide range of products, including chemicals, hardware, electrical products, machined parts and tooling t Just in Time (JIT) Delivery t Point of Use Management t Chemical Communication Management t Kitting Services

www.wescoair.com

www.haasgroupintl.com

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 31

DEFENSE inviting heads of industry to come and talk with us about the purchase of this material because there could be export possibilities involved with this as well,” Le Drian says.

He declines to specify what types of defense equipment would be purchased by the company for leaseback to the government. But in testimony before lawmakers last month, the head of the DGA, France’s defense procurement agency, cited the Airbus A400M tactical transport plane as one possibility.

“Take the example of an A400M delivered to France in 2014,” DGA Director General Laurent Collet-Billon said.

“We resell it to the project company for about €150 million, and the company pays us immediately that amount, then we pay for a pre-agreed period an amount equal to the annual rent,” including equipment depreciation.

Other examples could include the Airbus Multirole Tanker Transport, CN235 transport aircraft and “one might also consider helicopters for maritime surveillance,” Collet-Billon said.

However, not all material purchases would easily lend themselves to lease

by the defense ministry. For example, lawmakers are nervous about the lease of refueling aircraft or any other asset associated with France’s nuclear deterrent, especially if nonFrench investors comprise the company’s ownership.

Pierre Lellouche, trade minister under former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, says he was disappointed in Le Drian’s proposal to establish an outside company that would lease material to the armed forces and asserts that his entire budget was heavily reliant on unstable sources of funds.

“You have invented a special tool, a legal UFO,” Lellouche told lawmakers at the hearing. “You want to give ownership of weapons—the heart of our sovereignty—to we don’t know what private enterprise,” he said, asserting that the proposal would face ownership and insurance concerns. “It all seems surreal.”

In addition to skittish lawmakers, Le Drian could face opposition to the proposal from the French tax authorities, which over the summer signaled their discomfort to parliamentarians. “The letters we received show

REAPER LOVE I

mpressed with the performance of its first two U.S. MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial systems (UAS), France is looking forward to delivery of a third in early 2015.

“We made the right choice, if you believe the users,” Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told French lawmakers last month, adding that the General Atomics-built Reaper has enabled “meaningful” engagements in support of the French-led Operation Barkhane in Mali, and that the U.S. technology is superior to that of France's four Harfangs built by Israei Aerospace Industries.

Reaper, which is larger than the Harfang and can carry a bigger sensor payload with more electrical power for radar and communications, has been in service with France since late last year. The third of 12 Reaper systems on order, it is expected to arrive in Niamey, Niger, at the beginning of 2015, according to Laurent ColletBillon, head of French defense equipment agency DGA, who says another system is to be ordered next year.

In his testimony, Collet-Billon said he hopes the U.S. will work with France to allow “Frenchification” of the Reaper system.

“We hope that the U.S. Air Force agrees to give us the opportunity to modify the equipment or programming of the current Reaper production,” Collet-Billon said. “As Americans have their own equipment in Africa, in Niamey, they fully understand the value of collaboration. We are confident they will make the necessary eforts.”

32 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

that there has been some discussion on this topic, but they show very high tension and, at least, a lack of convergence,” says Francois Cornut-Gentille, a member of the finance committee.

While Le Drian vows to make good on his promise of stitching together a patchwork of funding solutions and shore up the nation’s military spending, he concedes that the ministry continues to come up short in paying annual bills, which lawmakers say pile up as they roll from one year into the next.

“It is one of my major concerns,” Le Drian says, adding that he expects the ministry’s amount in arrears to be lower this year than last. “It probably will decrease from €3.4 billion in 2013 to €3.1 in 2014.”

But Lellouche says that between the ministry’s €2.1 billion dependence on one-time revenues, the annual carryover of around €3.4 billion in unpaid bills and another €1.2 billion in operational expenses, about €6.8 billion of the €31.4 billion budget for 2015 remains uncertain. “In total, 23% of the annual budget, or the equivalent of 80% of the equipment budget, is fictitious,” Lellouche says. c

Collet-Billon said that while such modifications could be made to France's future Reaper orders, “we question the realization of an eavesdropping payload on the drones,” and added: “We are not certain the Americans would be willing to give us their own technologies in this field.”

In the meantime, France expects the EU to support a multilateral development of an indigenous UAS system for surveillance and reconnaissance missions.

Le Drian explained that France is committed “to the generation that will follow the Reaper drones in 2025.” He said an industry proposal by Dassault Aviation of France, Airbus Defense and Space of Germany and Finmeccanica of Italy to develop a medium-altitude, long-endurance UAS would be assessed at a European Council meeting scheduled for June next year.

“The European Defense Agency has been tasked to carry out the studies, particularly on the integration of drones in the skies over Europe,” Le Drian said, though he said Berlin has been reticent to support a European UAS system since its own EuroHawk development ran afoul of International Civil Aviation Organization regulatory constraints last year.

“After extensive public debate that took place in Germany around the EuroHawk drone in particular, we will develop active cooperation in the field of observation drones,” he said. “It will allow us to have a new generation of drones, which seems essential.” c AviationWeek.com/awst

DEFENSE

Brazil should receive its new JAS 39E/Fs in 2019-24, with the final aircraft assembled by Embraer.

All Systems Go Brazilian Gripen contract signed ahead of schedule SAAB CONCEPT

Bill Sweetman Washington

S

ignature of a contract for 36 Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen fighters for Brazil—covering technology transfer, the development of the JAS 39F two-seater and a substantial role in the program for Embraer and other Brazilian companies—is a turning point in Gripen’s history, Saab ofcials say.

“It’s definitely the biggest export order that Saab has ever signed,” Lennart Sindahl, senior vice president and head of aeronautics, tells Aviation Week, describing the $5.4 billion contract. “Some say it is the biggest single export order ever signed by a Swedish company, but I have not checked.”

Sindahl says he is particularly pleased that the order was signed ahead of schedule—the goal was to conclude the contract a year after Brazil announced its choice of the Gripen over the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Dassault Rafale, in late December 2013. “The customer handled the deal in a very professional manner,” Sindahl says.

Saab now has a firm-order backlog for 106 JAS 39E/Fs, all of them new aircraft. The first of three development aircraft, designated 39-8, is expected to fly in the first half of 2015.

In early January, 100-150 Embraer engineers are expected to arrive in Linkoping, the site of Saab’s aeronautics activities, he says. The team will develop the JAS 39F and prepare for co-production.

Around 15 of the Gripens will be wholly assembled in Brazil, including all of the two-seaters. The remainder will be built in Sweden by Swedish and Brazilian engineers. Deliveries

will run from 2019 to 2024.

The contract defines workshare for Brazilian industry, but full details have not yet been released. In 2013, Saab said that if Brazil bought Gripens, Embraer would have access to source code for the development of upgrades and weapon integration and would assemble aircraft for Latin American customers. Brazilian companies would be eligible to bid for up to 80% of the aerostructure work in the entire program. Sindahl confirms that “in general, the contract supports Brazil’s role as a partner, including export sales.”

The suddenness of the signing on Oct. 24 took many by surprise. Brazilian officials at the rollout of the Embraer KC-390 on Oct. 21 said they expected the Gripen contract to be signed toward the end of the year. The process may have been brought forward ahead of Brazil’s presidential election that saw President Dilma Roussef reelected by a narrow margin.

The Brazilian government puts a $13 billion price tag on the program, including the value of the technology transfer, which Brazilian engineers hope could eventually provide the know-how to produce a domestic follow-on fighter.

The Brazilian air force’s plan is to first replace its F-5EM/FM force, while a follow-on order to replace the AMX International A-1M Striker—originally a joint Embraer/Alenia development— could come after 2024, bringing total Brazilian orders up to 100 aircraft.

Brazil plans to use the Gripen for air defense, airspace policing, attack and reconnaissance. The first unit to

34 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

receive the new model will be the 1st Air Defense Group, based in Anapolis, which has been without aircraft since its Dassault Mirage 2000s were retired in December 2013.

Two other aspects of the deal, financing and a “bridge” lease of JAS 39C/Ds, are the subject of governmentto-government negotiation. The lease is expected to be concluded before the end of the year. Approximately 10 single and twin-seat aircraft reportedly will be leased, with the aim of providing an operational capability in time for the 2016 Olympic Games.

Financing for Saab’s share of the contract will be provided by Sweden’s EKN export-import bank. It was reported in 2013 that Brazil will not have to make any payments to Saab until the last aircraft in the initial batch had been delivered, and would have 15 years to pay after that.

Also in prospect is co-development of the Sea Gripen carrier- capable fighter. It would be based on a singleseat version of the JAS 39F, with more internal fuel than the JAS 39E. Saab has “talked to representatives of the Brazilian navy,” Sindahl says, and the service has publicly disclosed its team’s visit to Linkoping and the arrival of a technical team from Saab on the aircraft carrier Sao Paulo. The government announced in August that the carrier, formerly France’s Foch, would enter another major refit in 2015 to resolve mechanical problems and would serve until 2029.

Saab was “a little bit surprised,” says Sindahl, by the Oct. 21 announcement by the Brazilian and Argentine defense ministers that they were ready to negotiate an Argentine order for 24 Brazilian-assembled Gripens.

The U.K. and U.S. are unlikely to approve the sale of the Selex-ES Raven radar or F414 engine to Argentina, observers believe, unless that nation abandons its claims on the Falkland Islands. Moreover, deliveries of Embraer-assembled Gripens are some way in the future.

Other Gripen export activities include a potential lease to Slovakia, and Sindahl says there is “increasing interest” in the Asia-Pacific region. c With Tony Osborne in London.

AviationWeek.com/awst

Raytheon is funding a seeker upgrade to the Tomahawk missile to extend its life into the 2030s

Thirty years since its introduction, the Tomahawk is still key to providing the opening shots in major air campaigns.

Tony Osborne London

T

hirty years since the first iterations entered service, the Tomahawk cruise missile remains one of the key elements in the U.S. Navy’s long-range attack capability.

Nearly 50 of the missiles were recently fired against Islamic State militants and other terror groups during the early airstrikes in Syria as part of what is now known as Operation Inherent Resolve, and the weapon has been used as the opening shot in many of the major military operations since Desert Storm in 1991. It is often used to hit strategically important targets.

But Raytheon wants to further boost the weapon’s tactical capabilities to ready it for a possible contest to meet the U.S. Navy’s Ofensive AntiSurface Warfare requirement.

The company is spending $40 million of its own cash to improve the moving target and discrimination systems on the Block IV model weapon that entered service with the U.S. Navy in 2004. In 2008, the U.K. Royal Navy adopted the torpedo-tube-fired version.

Recent trials vetted a new-design passive seeker that detects radiation emitters. This was flown in April on an adapted T-39 Sabreliner business jet testbed equipped with the nose of a Tomahawk fitted to the front of the aircraft. The passive seeker will give the weapon electronic support measures, including listening for particular radar types and helping to steer the weapon away from benign civilian radars that monitor weather.

AviationWeek.com/awst

Next spring, the company will test a millimeter-wave, active seeker combined with a new high-speed processor, which will allow the weapon to image the target to confirm it is the correct one before entering terminal attack maneuvers. The company wants to achieve a technology readiness level of 6 on the seeker before captive-carry flights next summer.

“Our strategy was to have one missile doing all missions, explained Roy Donelson, program director for Tomahawk at Raytheon, speaking at the London Science Museum on Oct. 27.

“Tomahawk is already capable of dealing with mobile and fixed targets [and now] we can provide better target discrimination, better capability against moving targets with the seeker.”

Currently, the only way for Tomahawk to hit mobile targets is by using the Block IV’s ability to deliver new GPS coordinates of the target to the weapon through its data link. The three Cruise Missile Support Activity sites at Norfolk Virginia, Hawaii and Northwood, U.K., responsible for planning Tomahawk missions, are able to rapidly pass updated target position information in the final moments—the end game—of the missile’s flight. This provides the weapons with the potential for long-range anti-ship strike, as well as the ability to handle significant mobile targets on land.

It has been more than a decade since the Navy ditched the Tomahawk Anti-

Ship Missile, a version of the weapon fitted with inertial guidance and the seeker head from the Boeing Harpoon anti-ship missile. Raytheon says one concern with that version was its inability to clearly discriminate between targets, especially from a long distance.

Donelson believes the weapon could be ideal for any future long-range antiship requirement because of the new seeker, but specifications for a potential Increment II Ofensive Anti-Surface Warfare competition are not yet available.

The company has also proved that the weapon could perform battle-damage-assessment missions by relaying images via a data link as it passes over previously attacked targets on the way to its own, and it has also completed a series of high- and medium-altitude flights. The ability to take out concrete-reinforced structures may also be introduced through the use of the Joint Multiple Efects Warhead System (JMEWS), originally tested in 2010. Donelson says an engineering, manufacturing, and development contract for JMEWS could emerge in 2016.

The company hopes the Navy will keep the weapon in production until at least 2019 when early batches of the Block IV missile will need to be recertified and upgraded for another 15 years of life. The fiscal 2015 budget calls for production of around 100 missiles, but $82 million more maybe added to allow for another 96 missiles to be purchased. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 35

U.S. NAVY

Old Missile, New Tricks

DEFENSE

Sensory Input Airborne UAV infrared data are key in Aegis BMD test

Amy Butler Washington

The Missile Defense Agency plans to install the MTS-C onto the Reaper UAV for testing next year.

T

a medium-range ballistic missile target launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii.

“The Aegis lab reported achieving launch-on-remote criteria” during the test, MDA spokesman Rick Lehner says. This was the first time sensors in the Airborne Infrared (ABIR) program were used as a cue for launching on remote. Through ABIR, MDA has been experimenting with the use of Raytheon’s Multispectral Targeting System (MTS) sensors to provide early cues of a ballistic missile launch.

These sensors are widely used against ground targets in Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere.

In a ballistic missile defense role, the sensors can facilitate an attempt at an early intercept because they begin to cue interceptors almost immediately after a target launch. This gives operators a “shoot-look-shoot” approach to taking multiple shots at a target if one should miss. The curvature of the Earth can prevent the shipbased SPY-1 radar on Aegis ships from acquiring a target early enough in an engagement to allow for multiple shots based on a ship’s own sensor data.

For FTX-20, one MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aircraft, equipped with Raytheon’s MTS-B (its standard targeting ball) orbited at 40,000 ft. in a combat air patrol, Lehner says. Two upgraded ground-based MTS-C sensors on the Makaha Ridge on Kauai in Hawaii also participated.

36 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

The MTS-C incorporates multiple electro-optical and infrared detectors, allowing it to view the target scene in long-, mid- and short-wave infrared, the visible/near-infrared monochrome and a color/low-light television mode.

The MTS-C design is optimized to acquire a target at launch—when it is hot and burns through the atmosphere— and track it well into space as it cools.

Raytheon deferred to the MDA regarding comments on the sensor.

“All three of the sensors tracked the target complex for over 9 min.,” and they were able to provide a “stereo track” to the ground-based lab with enough fidelity to satisfy launch on remote criteria, Lehner says. Using multiple sensors from diferent angles provides this stereo track, which ofers much more high-fidelity cueing for launching on remote. The stereo track was provided to the Aegis lab via Link 16 messages.

MDA intends to install MTS-C on a Reaper and begin airborne trials next year.

In the coming weeks, MDA plans to execute Flight Test Standard Missile-26, which will pit the Aegis configured with the 5.0 Capability Upgrade systems against a medium-range ballistic missile target launched from Kauai. A Raytheon SM-3 Block 1B missile, which includes a throttleable divert and attitude-control system as well as two-color infrared sensor, will be used against the target for a kill. c AviationWeek.com/awst

U.S. AIR FORCE

he most recent Missile Defense Agency (MDA) trial last month for the Aegis ballistic missile defense system is moving the agency closer to proving that airborne infrared sensors can be used to cue a ballistic target intercept.

The agency’s ultimate goal is to integrate the disparate elements of a vast ballistic missile defense system— including satellites, airborne infrared data and ground- and ship-based radars—into a single system of sensors and shooters functioning seamlessly. A product of this architecture would be to “launch on remote” and eventually “engage on remote.”

By launching on remote, an interceptor would be fired at a target based on ofboard data—in this case, without the USS John Paul Jones Aegis destroyer’s own SPY-1 S-band radar acquiring the target. Once airborne, the host system, the SPY-1, would acquire the target and aid the interceptor as it heads for a kill.

With engage-on-remote operations, the host system’s sensor never actually acquires the target. Instead, an intercept is achieved using all ofboard data piped into the interceptor by way of the Pentagon’s Battle Command and Control, Battle Management and Communications system.

The Oct. 17 test did not include a live interceptor; ofcials simulated this part of the engagement in a groundbased laboratory in San Diego to save money. However, an actual intercept was not the primary goal. Flight Test Other-20 (FTX-20) was designed to conduct experiments with tracking

Pressure Is On Kendall is not ruling out more cost charges for Boeing in KC-46 work Amy Butler Washington

A

lhough Boeing insists it will be able to provide the U.S. Air Force the 18 KC-46 Pegasus tankers it has promised in August 2017, flight of the first platform continues to slip.

The company is restructuring internal milestones for the KC-46 program in order to stay on target for this delivery.

Because it is operating under a fixed-price contract, Boeing is allowed some flexibility and freedom from typical government milestones in the program’s development. But it is responsible for the anticipated cost overage above the government’s $4.9 billion obligation for development and those first 18 refuelers.

The government’s 2014 estimate for the total cost of work is $5.9 billion, although Boeing ofcials say they expect to pay far less than that to keep the program afloat. The company announced a $272 million charge this summer to stay on track.

“Boeing is taking a pretty large loss,” Frank Kendall, Pentagon procurement chief, tells Aviation Week. “We expected that. We think there is a potential for additional loss, but there is a lot of business for Boeing at the end of this.” The Air Force plans to buy 179 tankers.

First flight for the initial 767-2C—the commercial derivative on which the KC-46 will be built—however, is now slated for “late November or early December,” says Caroline Hutcheson, a company spokeswoman. As of September, officials were targeting mid-November; originally, this aircraft was to take to the skies in June.

“The challenges that Boeing is addressing on its initial engineering and manufacturing development aircraft are leading the company to replan elements of its tanker workflow, and its internal schedules, to remain on track to meet the August 2017 contractual commitment to the Air Force.”

First flight of the first KC-46 is slated for April. USAF Maj. Gen. John Thompson, former program executive ofcer for the KC-46, said last month if this slips again, a Milestone C 38 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

BOEING/JOHN D. PARKER

DEFENSE

The modified KC-10 boom for use on the KC-46A was fit-checked last summer, but development aircraft are now awaiting fixes to the wiring. decision to enter full-rate production could shift as well. The KC-46 first flight is now scheduled about six months later than the original plan. The Milestone C decision is now expected in September 2015.

“There has been some slip in the program, but it is not dramatic,” Kendall says. “They can meet their basic commitments. . . . Right now, I don’t see a major delay in the program. It could happen, but I think they are continuing to make progress.”

The company had to redesign some wiring bundles for the development aircraft because the original configuration did not incorporate proper wiring shielding or adhere to mandatory separation distances between systems in some cases.

This separation is considered a safety issue. Boeing reported that the problem was with 5-10% of the bundles on the Boeing 767-2C prior to FAA testing. Hutscheson says the fix is “well defined and understood.”

The 767-2C includes about 50 mi. more of wiring than the commercial 767 variant, which includes about 70 mi. of wiring, according to Thompson.

Also troublesome has been completion of functional testing, according to Ed Gulick, an Air Force spokesman. This is a result of a “ripple efect” from the wiring issue, which afects such milestones as power-on and display check testing, Hutcheson says.

The Air Force is assessing a proposal from Boeing to shift internal milestones to stay on track for the 2017 delivery; if approved, these changes would be incorporated into the integrated master schedule early next year, Gulick says.

The service will then conduct a schedule risk assessment, he says. The government does not yet know how much the $5.9 billion estimate to complete development will change as a result of the new plan.

Based on the burn rate of $7.8 million per month to date, the program will deplete its management reserve funds in March 2015, Gulick says.

Boeing won the KC-135 replacement contract in February 2011 after a protracted duel with Airbus, which ofered its A330-based refueler. c AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY

MRO ASIA

Help Wanted

Filling the Shortfalls in Asia MRO15

ST AEROSPACE

AviationWeek.com/mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

Stay true Whichever way you cut it, the many facets of the TRUEngine™ program add more sparkle to your CFM56 investment. World-class support, unmatched product knowledge, and the peace of mind knowing your engine has been maintained to CFM’s precise standards. But the real gem is retaining as much as 50% higher residual value*. Brilliant.

Go to cfmaeroengines.com/services CFM International is a 50/50 joint company between Snecma (Safran) and GE. *Based on CFM, GE and independent third-party research.

Unmatched Experience | World-Class Support | Exceptional Value

CFM56

MRO Edition

MAINTENANCE CHECK

Contents MRO4

MRO8

MRO ASIA

MRO Asia Thought Leaders Executives share their insights on MRO in the region Power Play Evergreen Aviation Technologies Chairman Michael Chang discusses engine joint venture

MRO10

Moving On? Will MAS Engineering be put up for sale?

MRO15

MRO Help Wanted Looking at how the AsiaPacific region will find enough maintenance professionals to keep up with fleet growth

MRO16

MRO22

MRO31

MRO32

MRO34

MRO38

OPERATIONS

Easing Leasing Transfers Varied regulations, documentation requirements cost the airline industry time and money

AVIONICS

Chasing No Fault Found Better data analytics, fault isolation and predictive maintenance tools target rogue avionics units

COMPOSITES

Bolt-On Repairs Views diverge on bonded repairs to primary composite structures

PAINT

Coatings Conglomerate Going Global Next steps could be in Asia, Middle East or OEM work

ENGINE ANALYSIS

Growth Mode As the CFM56 order book cools, the aftermarket heats up

SAFETY & REGULATORY NEWS Serious Business

MRO40

Signing Off

MRO42

Working Tired

MRO44

MRO LINKS

Aerospace Leasing Services

Cover photo: ST Aerospace The next issue of the MRO Edition will be dated Dec. 1/8.

AviationWeek.com/mro

A Logical Look

I

f we were to step back and look at MRO logically—and holistically—would we structure it as it is now? Probably not.

Individual airlines, maintenance facilities, engine test cells and backshops can streamline processes and insert technologies to make MRO functions more efcient, but obstructions hold us back.

For instance, look at the contract language—can you protect your company but do so without adding verbiage that prevents you from getting to a deal quicker?

Audits serve a very useful purpose, but do companies need to undergo dozens each year to ensure quality systems? At some point do we need to enhance quality—rather than audit it?

How much advantage is actually gained by having each airline tailor standard maintenance programs to its “unique” operations? Or asked another way, by optimizing reliability through a customized program, how much lower are costs than those under a standardized maintenance program? (I’m anticipating some airline wrath from this one, but it’s important to understand the tradeof.)

Perhaps these are utopian questions, but let’s tackle a big one: regulatory harmonization—beyond bilaterals.

Think of the advantages that could stem from harmonization.

For instance, national regulatory systems continue to develop their own aircraft technical requirements that add substantial costs when transferring aircraft across borders (see page MRO18). This lack of harmonization does not enhance safety.

While industry organizations such as the Aviation Working Group, ICAO and IATA are working on harmonizing some of the cross-border transferability and airworthiness issues,

This lack of harmonization does not enhance safety.

there are multiple layers to tackle and not one unified plan.

“The result is a significant amount of maintenance being re-performed to satisfy the new lessee requirements, which costs the old lessee and the lessor,” says David Marcontell, TeamSAI president and COO, with whom I spoke at the Aeronautical Repair Station Association’s Strategic Leadership Conference in Montreal Oct. 16.

ARSA, which is celebrating its 30th anniversary, does a terrific job of advocating for repair stations and assisting them in diferentiating between regulatory compliance and business demands.

Part of the impediment is education, so ARSA is developing an online regulatory compliance training program to assist the industry—and eventually it plans to “establish the world aviation regulatory compliance schematic, because we have to figure out a way for all these countries that need MRO services to use any organization in the world without unnecessary expenditures of either time or money,” says Sarah MacLeod, the association’s executive director.

Actions such as these would make MRO a less-complicated business.

Let’s take more holistic steps. c

—Lee Ann Tegtmeier Chief Editor MRO

Follow our MRO Asia coverage from Singapore at AviationWeek.com/MRO Keep up with Tegtmeier on MRO’s blog: AviationWeek.com/mro and on Twitter: @AvWeekMRO

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO3

MRO Edition

MRO ASIA

MRO Asia Thought Leaders Edited by Lee Ann Tegtmeier Chicago

Aviation Week asked these aftermarket leaders in Asia-Pacific to share their insights on the business of MRO in the region—in advance of MRO Asia in Singapore.

RICHARD BUDIHADIANTO President and CEO • GMF AeroAsia Chairman • Indonesia Aircraft Maintenance Services Association (IAMSA) The Asia-Pacific MRO sector is geared to achieve maximum growth targets as more aircraft operators outsource their MRO requirements. The Indonesian MRO sector is ripe to benefit from such shifts within the region, as the country enjoys one of the lowest labor costs, along with increased investment in technology and infrastructure. The major challenges for industry stakeholders will be ensuring that we grow at a controlled and sustainable pace, achieving value-added solutions and faster turnaround times.

Indonesian carriers will spend $915 million on MRO work this year. This figure is expected to more than double to $2 KAZ HIYOSHI Senior Vice President • Japan Air Commuter The Asian aviation aftermarket is still growing, and there are many MROs across the region.

This means airlines have lots of suitable MRO candidates from which to choose. But they also need to determine what maintenance should be conducted in-house and what to outsource, based on their business model.

Meanwhile, passenger expectations for on-time aircraft performance increase steadily. In Japan, every high-speed RAYMOND TAN Head of Engineering • Tiger Air MRO providers perform specific maintenance work, which is usually labor-intensive. To reduce costs, airlines often outsourced heavy manpower requirements to lower labor-cost countries.

However, outsourcing is beginning to move up the skill ladder. It no longer involves just heavy maintenance work, but the entire spectrum of engineering and maintenance tasks. The emergence of smaller low-cost carriers (LCC) is one trend driving such outsourcing.

Tomorrow’s MRO providers will be faced with having to offer new value-added services. Airlines will ask, what else can you do for us? Some MROs are already providing services such as engineering repair in conjunction with maintenance. There

MRO4

billion by 2023. Indonesian MRO companies now absorb less than 30% of the country’s maintenance work, with 70% outsourced to other companies in the region. IAMSA and the government plan to double MRO capabilities over the next five years to absorb up to 60% of local aircraft maintenance work. To do this, an additional 2,000 technicians and engineers will be needed, as well as an aerospace park.

One of the most important issues facing Indonesia’s MRO industry is the upcoming shortage of MRO specialists, which will afect the development of aviation here. Securing the necessary skilled human resources—a problem the entire industry should address in concert—is imperative.

I look forward to the continued strong alliance between the Indonesian government and the aviation industry. Jointly we can further develop our MRO industry to new heights of productivity, grow our skilled workforce, and gain international recognition as a major MRO hub. c “Shinkansen” bullet train operates within 15 seconds of schedule. Aircraft operations are also expected to perform at the same level, and delays cause a financial burden.

To maintain reliable airline operations, suitable levels of spare parts are necessary. The Asian region has a geographical disadvantage, as it is relatively distant from OEMs. Some areas have OEM warehouses, but their stocks are generally limited and are not quite adequate. Asian airlines have to make their own logistics arrangements for spares in these circumstances.

Choosing the optimal MRO and making appropriate logistics decisions are critical factors for Asian operators. c are other services that MROs can perform to add value. For example, warranty administration—helping airlines to make warranty claims—would be little additional work, but would be a good value, especially for small LCCs. Ofering some level of rotable repair management would also make sense. The MROs receive the airlines’ LRUs and return the unserviceable ones—so why not do limited repair management and hold units for future aircraft coming in? Long-term maintenance planning services could be another opportunity.

Increasingly, MROs are being asked to move up the skills ladder. Line maintenance services, although not really a skill-level increase compared with heavy maintenance, can be paired with services that require higher skill levels. For example, maintenance control, defect analysis, planning and the full spectrum of fleet technical management services. Add value and you become valuable, too. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

I N N O V

O N I

A never-ending story.

A T

Lufthansa Technik is synonymous with innovation.

Thanks to creative engineering work and cutting-edge research facilities, we constantly set new standards. Alongside the continuous further development of maintenance, repair, and overhaul procedures, we develop new technologies, cabin products, and servicing processes for aviation.

Always striving for the highest quality and safety standards, we are able to guarantee technological excellence.

Lufthansa Technik AG, marketing.sales@lht.dlh.de Call us: +49-40-5070-5553

www.lufthansa-technik.com/innovation

More mobility for the world

mobiljetoil387.com

MRO Edition

MRO ASIA EVERGREEN AVIATION TECHNOLOGIES

Power Play Paul Seidenman San Francisco When Evergreen Aviation Technologies (EGAT) and GE Aviation announced a joint venture to provide major maintenance on the GEnx engine, the Taipei-based MRO made what appears to be a sure bet on the continued success of the GE-built, widebody aircraft powerplant. The GEnx MRO joint venture, to be marketed under GE Evergreen Engine Services, was formally launched in March and is slated to have full overhaul capability by 2019. In an interview with Aviation Week, EGAT Chairman Michael Chang discusses the joint venture and other plans to grow what has been a successful boutique MRO operation since its establishment in 1998.

AW&ST: Why did GE Evergreen Engine Services decide to focus exclusively on the GEnx? Chang: The GEnx family is the bestselling engine in GE Aviation history, with more than 1,500 engines currently on order. Over the last two years, GE Aviation has increased production and will deliver close to 300 GEnx engines in 2014. There will be a significant need for a best-in-class overhaul shop, and GE recognized the potential of such a competitive facility in EGAT. Will EGAT compete for GEnx maintenance globally, or mostly within the Asia/Pacific region?

Boeing airframes are our specialty.

Our expertise includes the 737NG, 747, 767 and 777 airframe families.

Our capabilities and experience also include the Airbus A320 and A330 Airbus airframe series. In addition, we are developing our 787 airframe capabilities.

EGAT is a designated Boeing Edge program service center. Will it be doing major airframe work on the 787 and 737 MAX families?

Barring unforeseen circumstances or major changes, EGAT will handle major airframe maintenance on both 787 and 737 MAX airframes.

GEnx maintenance services are jointly marketed by GE and EGAT through GE Evergreen Engine Services. After customers contract with GE, maintenance services are distributed to GE’s network of GEnx MRO facilities, including GE Evergreen Engine Services.

Does EGAT plan to expand its Airbus maintenance to include the A350 or A320neo?

Will EGAT have to build new facilities to accommodate GEnx work?

Where do you see the most opportunities for EGAT in airframe maintenance within the next five years?

We have no plans to build new facilities for engine overhauls. Our new hangar, scheduled for completion in mid-2016, will be used for airframe maintenance.

Our greatest opportunities are in our ability to deliver high-value service solutions to airframe customers. EGAT expects to be working on a steady stream of A320s, 737NGs, 747s, 767s, 777s and 787 airframes over the next five years.

In addition to letter checks, we expect winglet modifications, interior and inflight entertainment system upgrades, nitrogen-inerting gas system and WIFIinstallations to be prominent portions of our service menu.

carriers in the Asia/Pacific region, or by large international carriers operating widebodies?

International carriers make up a sizeable portion of EGAT’s customer base.

Low-cost carriers amount to a considerably smaller volume of business. By default, low-cost carriers focus on the lowest costs. While EGAT is highly competitive, we are not and will not be the cheapest MRO.

What are some of the challenges you face over the next five years?

Training in the aircraft MRO industry is time-consuming. It takes time to develop critical hand skillsets. We also face the challenges of a limited pool of young adults interested in entering the industry. Cost-growth pressures are also a concern. EGAT efectively manages this issue by making mechanics stakeholders in the company. The greater the company’s profit, the better our employees’ bonuses.

Are you considering any expansion of your facilities beyond Taiwan?

Will most of your opportunities in airframe maintenance be generated by the emerging low-cost

EGAT is a mid-sized, boutique aircraft MRO with a controlled growth projection. To ensure consistent delivery of quality services to our customers, we plan to keep our operations here in Taiwan. MRO services are labor-intensive.

Understanding the workforce and effectively managing the productivity is critical to the high quality of consistent services that EGAT’s airline partners have come to expect. Any expansion outside of Taiwan would bring additional management challenges and risks. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

Are there plans to expand the joint venture to other engines?

Currently, we have no plans to extend the joint venture beyond the GEnx.

EGAT is a well-known commercial airframe MRO. Which airframes are EGAT’s specialty today, and on which new airframes will EGAT plan to develop maintenance expertise?

MRO8

We have no plans to expand EGAT’s Airbus product MRO oferings, beyond the A320 and A330.

Evergreen Aviation Technologies has specialized in Boeing airframe work, as evidenced by this 50th heavy maintenance visit for UPS in May, but is expanding its engine capabilities through a joint venture with GE.

TRUST THE COMPANY THAT BUILT YOUR AIRCRAFT. With 10 parts depots in 10 countries and 1.5 billion dollars in inventory, Bombardier can cater to all of your parts replacement needs. But did you know that Bombardier also has over 50 years of experience in Component Repair and Overhaul (CR&O)?

Through facilities in Europe, North America and Asia our highly-skilled technicians provide component restoration solutions.

So when it comes down to repair or replace, the best answer is always Bombardier.

CONTACT YOUR CUSTOMER SERVICES REPRESENTATIVE TODAY TO SEE HOW WE CAN HELP YOU.

customerservices.aero.bombardier.com *Bombardier and You. First. are trademarks of Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. Š 2014 Bombardier Inc. All rights reserved.

MRO Edition

MRO ASIA

Moving On? Malaysian’s MRO division is profitable. But will that put it at the top of the ‘for sale’ list?

Jeremy Torr Singapore

T

he current state of imbalance in the Southeast Asian MRO market is clearly illustrated by the example of Malaysian Airlines (MAS).

Even before the disastrous losses of MH370 and MH17, the airline had seen three consecutive yearly losses, capped by a spectacular RM 1.17 billion ($359 million) in 2013. As a result, key investor Malaysian sovereign state fund Khazanah stepped in early in August this year, buying out existing shareholders and imposing a significant restructuring.

As part of this plan, the airline is to see up to 6,000 jobs cut, subsidiary businesses potentially sold of, and new

carriers like AirAsia, Lion Air, Tigerair, Scoot and Cebu Pacific are all expanding their operations at breakneck speed—and having to fly aircraft overseas to find cost-effective MRO facilities to take their bulging fleets.

As spokesman Mochamad Aviv from Indonesian MRO GMF told Aviation week, the local growth of MRO in Indonesia is expanding at 15-20% a year. The company is due to add a new hangar at its Soekarno-Hatta base to house 16 narrowbody aircraft—one of the largest in Asia, along with a new hangar at the recently revamped Bintan MRO facility near Singapore. But Aviv notes that planning for the manpower required for

ago. And with the pre-MH370/MH17 order of up to 100 new aircraft from Airbus now in question, it is highly possible that potential training and skills upgrades will also be put on hold.

However, what is bad news for the state carriers could be good news for the increasing number of low-cost carriers (LCC) springing up around the region. Maseu’s Aziz said that several regional carriers have expressed interest in taking on ex-MAS employees, partly due to its solid reputation and good training record.

Which poses the question for the MAS restructuring team whether to retain its MRO operation at its existing bases at Subang or KLIA and lease out the infrastructure assets such as hangars, or to sell of the whole division as a going concern and factor out its maintenance to one of the other local operators such as Haeco, ST Aerospace, Lufthansa Philippines or even Ameco in Beijing.

A parallel issue also will face technicians at MAE—to move to another country where the demand for labor is higher but wages are lower, or stay in

MAS Engineering operates 18 bays in six hangars at three airports.

MAS ENGINEERING

management put in place. The entire company would then be restructured by a special task force that would mold the carrier into a slimmer, more efcient airline that could return to the stock exchange by 2019.

According to MAS’s in-house union Malaysia Airlines System Employees Union (Maseu), up to half of the redundancies or job cuts could come from the MRO subsidiary, Malaysian Aerospace Engineering (MAE).

“If MAE is sold, about 3,000 employees in the division will be afected,” claims Maseu’s president, Alias Aziz.

Whether a substantial number would actually lose their jobs is not clear, but it is likely that some would be let go as the operation gets smaller. The days of working for a fat and overweight government-supported carrier are likely to be gone soon for many MAS employees.

Meanwhile, in regional neighbors Singapore, Indonesia and Vietnam,

MRO10

this expansion through 2023 is already taking considerable efort.

The paradox is that MAE has been one of the better-managed and more profitable subsidiaries at MAS. The division has a solid reputation for MRO servicing not just for MAS, but on a wide range of aircraft for major carriers like Qantas, Gulf Air, Air France, KLM, and several local low-cost carriers.

With some 18 bays for widebody and narrowbody aircraft in six hangars at three airports, MAE claims up to 100 international customers worldwide.

The division also saw a 16% jump in income in fiscal 2013 compared to 2012, and has slimmed down its workforce over the last year, but the disastrous first half of 2014 for MAS changed things dramatically.

The losses at MAS group already have seen MAE forced to pull out of its Indian joint venture with GMR in Hyderabad, set up only three years

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

Malaysia and hope that local LCCs will pick up the slack. Maseu is optimistic, but the reality might be harsher.

“Aside from AirAsia, there are a lot of other airlines that want workers from MAS,” said Aziz. “They know that MAS has quality.” Certainly, initiatives coming out of Thailand and the Philippines indicate that both are keen to set up local MRO centers, with the help of overseas majors like Airbus and Lufthansa that see the built-in demand for skilled MRO operations in coming years. The key question is, are those skilled workers also the mobile ones?

But the fate of MAE and its staf, like that of MAS, depends heavily on political winds. AirAsia and MAS/Khazanah put together a share-swap deal in 2011 to help maximize productivity and cut costs. But pressure from vested interests was enough to push Khazanah into backtracking and scrapping the deal just one year later.

As Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak recently said: “We have to look at it from all angles. It’s not a private company, so there are certain repercussions in what you want to do.” c

AviationWeek.com/mro

ADVERTISEMENT

HYDRO Systems: The global partner of Aircraft Industry Since 1965 HYDRO Group cooperates with the leading aircraft and engine manufacturers, MROs, airlines and air forces. The global player provides more than 3,000 Ground Support Equipment products and more than 40,000 maintenance tools to over 700 customers worldwide. HYDRO Systems does not only offer a wide range of standard products, but also provides the design of customer specific engineering solutions reaching from a special screwdriver to a complete aircraft assembling dock.

Ground Support Equipment In addition to tripod jacks, axle jacks, tow bars and the engine change systems COBRA HYDRO`s portfolio includes the full range of GSE products.

The close collaboration of HYDRO’s project engineers with the aircraft manufacturers for final assembly line configuration enables HYDRO to design the GSE for a new aircraft type before the first aircraft is delivered to an airline customer. All GSE products are manufactured in house. Both, the outstanding quality made in Germany and the robust design, guarantee a trouble-free operation and a long-life cycle.

HYDRO has established a warehouse strategy for its top-selling GSE products. Top seller products in standard equipment and color are manufactured in cost efficient batch sizes on stock. This provides the customer with lower sales prices and guarantees shortest lead times.

Engine Tooling HYDRO Systems is the sole Tooling Service Provider for the Rolls-Royce Plc civil engine program.

HYDRO has an exclusive contract for the design and supply of tools for all civil engines manufactured by Rolls-Royce Plc such as Trent and RB211 engines used on Airbus and Boeing aircrafts. To better support the customer needs, HYDRO has established a subsiadary site in the UK (Derby) where 110 employees are solely working on Rolls-Royce engine business.

Major milestones are the design and supply of 1,500 new tools for the Trent XWB program (Airbus A350 XWB) or the delivery of complete tooling packages to the first 3 overhaul shops for the XWB engine.

The Engine Transportation stands used for the Trent 1000 (Boeing B787) and Trent XWB (A350) have been designed by HYDRO. All stands are manufactured by HYDRO USA and delivered to Rolls-Royce

JLS - Jacking and Leveling System for Beluga

and the airline customers.

Furthermore HYDRO supplies IAE with tooling for the V2500 engine and is a regular licensed supplier of Goodrich nacelle tooling for operators of CFM56 and GE engines.

Aircraft Tooling Through its tool design expertise, its lean production and its worldwide supply chain HYDRO is the official licensee of Boeing, Sukhoi and Goodrich and the strategic design and manufacturing partner of Airbus, Embraer and Antonov.

HYDRO designes and manufactures most of the tools for the A400M military program.

Trent 1000 Engine Transportation Stand

Engineering A third of HYDRO´s workforce is involved in research and development. HYDRO designs customized solutions and supports customers all the way from the eruption of an idea to the complete implementation of major projects.

Due to its key know-how in transportation, leveling, positioning, installing and joining critical aircraft components and segments the company has designed and manufactured Final Assembly Line equipments for the most important aircraft manufacturers around the world.

HYDRO has demonstrated its capability to manage turnkey projects successfully. Its customized solutions enable MROs and Airlines to optimize their maintenance procedures. “Design to cost” guarantees value engineering.

Fuselage Transportation Trolley

Service As a full service provider HYDRO Systems provides after sales services like spare parts management, technical support, commissioning and training as well as on site maintenance and calibration, repair, proof load testing, recertification and modification.

A global network of service centers enables a full package on site service.

HYDRO´s repair stations are certified by Airbus, Boeing, Rolls-Royce and Didsbury. In April 2014 Airbus and HYDRO signed a Maintenance Agreement for the worldwide servicing and repair of GSE and maintenance tooling.

Test stand for proof load tests up to 350 metric tons

ADVERTISEMENT

Economical success In 2013 HYDRO boosted its market shares. The order intake increased by 56%. In 2014 the company will overcome a turnover of 126 Mill. US-Dollars.

The success story of the market leader is also reflected in the headcount, in 2013 the HYDRO group recruited 105 new employees.

HYDRO Towbar for Airbus A380

Organization More than 600 highly qualified employees are working for the fast expanding, family owned company.

The main production site is located in the German Black Forest area. The Auburn (US) facility is focused on the manufacturing of engine shipping stands and Boeing tooling. Both facilities are equipped with modern production technologies like welding robots and 5-axis CNC machining.

In the ongoing year the new facilities in Singapore and China will ramp up their operations.

With its German headquarter and subsidaries in Toulouse (F), Castle Donington (UK), Auburn (USA), Singapore and Tianjin (CN) plus a worldwide network of sales offices, agencies, warehouses and service centers HYDRO Systems is the global player in aircraft maintenance and manufacturing equipment.

COBRA Engine Change System

HYDRO Systems KG

HYDRO Systems USA Inc.

HYDRO Germany

HYDRO Dubai

Headquarters worldwide

Seattle, WA

Engineering Offce and Service Center Hamburg

Service Center Dubai

Ahfeldstrasse 10 77781 Biberach / Baden Germany Phone: +49 (0) 7835 787 - 0 Fax: +49 (0) 7835 1823 info@hydro.aero

HYDRO Systems UK Ltd. Castle Donnington

HYDRO Spain

HYDRO China

HYDRO Systems France SAS

Sales Offce Tulma Aviation S.L. - Madrid

Sales Offce Beijing

HYDRO Malta

HYDRO Japan

Toulouse

HYDRO Systems Singapore LLP Singapore

HYDRO Systems China Ltd. Tianjin

www.hydro.aero

Service Center Service Center Pro Tech Engineering Solutions Ltd.-Paola Horiguchi Engineering Co.Ltd. - Narita-shi

HYDRO Russia

HYDRO USA

Sales Offce Moscow

Sales Offce Miami, FL

and more than 50 sales representatives located worldwide!

MRO Help Wanted

Airframers are selling aircraft in Asia faster than to any other region. But who will maintain them?

Jeremy Torr Singapore

W

ith both Boeing and Airbus flagging major expansion of operator fleets across the Asian region—Airbus says 39% of its ongoing sales to 2033 will be in Asia and Boeing says expanding fleets will demand 224,000 new technicians by the same date—the outlook for MROs across the region should be rosy. However, finding those 224,000 technicians is likely to give both MRO operators and training and educational establishments alike severe headaches.

Asia, unlike the U.S. and Europe, does not have a steady and predictable flow of ex-military personnel waiting to fill civilian roles. Most of the technicians employed at Asian MROs are commercial recruits, or come direct from specialist educational courses.

Which means they will have come through a specialist schedule that can take years to complete. And they will have opted for an engineering career over what many see as more glamorous options, medicine, finance or law.

It’s a big request—and one that is not being answered.

“The supply of the right skills [regionally] is not yet fully ready to fulfill the aviation industry’s [future] needs,” warns Indonesia-based GMF AeroAsia spokesperson Mochamad Aviv.

Aviv says his company, the MRO subsidiary of Garuda Indonesia, has had to develop a recruitment strategy that meets immediate industry demands, yet at the same time prepares for projected expansion.

Although he says that the current pipeline in Indonesia is coping, he admits “we still [have to] compromise for dynamic demands,” if specific new business comes in that staf are not trained for. As a result, GMF has chosen an innovative approach that taps into and leverages its existing rating as an Aircraft Maintenance Training Organization (AMTO) Part 147 approved operation.

“As we already have AMTO 147 approval, we have used that to create [direct] partnerships with certain universities and polytechnics,” he ex-

AviationWeek.com/mro

plains. He says this has allowed the non-specialist educators to tap into GMF’s accreditation standards, yet produce courses that fully conform to AMTO 147 Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR) requirements.

GMF thinks this approach will help ofset what it sees as a limited future supply from industry-specific training establishments, as well as ensuring oversight to full aviation standards from Indonesia’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation.

GMF’s proactive approach to a looming Asian technician bottleneck ST AEROSPACE

ST Aerospace works closely with local education establishments to maintain a pipeline of trainees. is being echoed in Singapore.

“From what we see, there is a fiveyear lag from the point of demand,” says Lim Serh Ghee, COO at Singapore’s largest MRO, ST Aerospace.

Lim says STA, like GMF, has been working on “strong symbiotic relationships with local educational institutions” that will help satisfy the company’s future stafng needs. “We are doing our part, working closely with the local education institutions to build up the talent pool,” he says.

STA sits on the advisory committees of local Institutes of Technical Education (ITE), Polytechnics, and Singapore’s private university UniSIM to “[efectively] collaborate in the education and development of manpower to address the changing dynamics of

the industry,” says Lim. Educators are also aware of the impending numbers crunch in the aviation industry. Ng Teng Yong, acting head of the division of aerospace engineering at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University (NTU), says that although the university has no problem attracting the brightest students to its courses, there are always a certain proportion that are lured away by the prospect of a lucrative career in finance or other business.

“We take some 80-120 of the best students every year, and many go on to work at companies like Rolls-Royce or Pratt & Whitney,” he says. “But we do see a certain number of the cream of the crop going to finance and so on,” he admits, “so what we try to emphasize is the career prospects that come [in aviation].”

Ng says the big plus for new recruits into aerospace generally is that the good students can have their pick of jobs in Asia, the U.S., and the U.K., although he notes that today the “majority” stay in Asia, where they see the rapid expansion of the sector as ofering more dynamic prospects.

“There are—and we think there will continue to be—plenty of really good job oferings here,” he says. And like GMF and STA, Ng points out that the close links between educational establishments like NTU and the industry itself are vital.

NTU runs a series of regional roadshows designed to explain the attractions of a career in aviation engineering, although Ng says that most trainees and students probably already know what they are looking for.

GMF’s Aviv agrees, noting that as aviation becomes a more prominent sector in the region, it will only attract more trainees. “The trend is increasing and we believe that [aviation] will become a [career] trend for school leavers,” he says.

To meet staff demands in coming years, Lim says it is vital to engage young talent during their course of study. And part of this, he says, is maintaining ongoing training and skills upgrades. “It is crucial to ensure continued availability of [a highly skilled] talent pool. We believe in investing in our employees and supporting the industry with the next generation of highly skilled and competent aviation professionals,” says Lim. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO15

MRO Edition

OPERATIONS

Easing Lease Transfers Varied regulations, documentation requirements cost the airline industry time and money Henry Canaday Washington

A

n increasing proportion of commercial aircraft are leased rather than owned by airlines that operate them. This reliance on leasing has brought carriers major benefits, including more flexibility in fleet planning—especially in economic downturns—and better financial ratios. It is thus highly desirable that leasing be made as economic as possible, avoiding unnecessary cost and delays.

But that is not happening today, particularly at lease-end. When it is time for an airline to return equipment to the lessor and to prepare it for the next operator, the process—one that should take a couple of months—can stretch out to several times that period. And costs mount as time passes.

There are many reasons why endof-lease processes are so expensive.

Some originate in the highly varied regulations that afect aircraft in the many jurisdictions where they operate. These and other challenges are worsened because some airline lessees do not take lease-end obligations seriously enough, early enough.

Airlines need to check out specific lease terms much sooner. And the industry as a whole must attack some common causes of lease-cost creep.

“The biggest problem is failure to plan, which is really planning to fail,”

summarizes Patrick Ryan, senior vice president and chief technology ofcer for Aviation Capital Group. “Aircraft owners and airlines and maintenance shops are not on the same page on their contractual obligations. Then things spiral out of control.”

Airlines’ record-keeping staf often lack the time or expertise to meet the high and possibly diferent standards of documentation required for lease return. Ryan suggests hiring an outside company six months ahead of lease return to assemble required documentation.

Airline maintenance managers may view the lease-return check as another C check, with deferral of some items.

But lease-return checks must be done to higher standards than ordinary Cs. Even simple things like carpet cleaning must be done thoroughly. When simple things are missed, Ryan says, complex obligations will surely cause problems.

Such obligations sometimes spring from different regulatory regimes around the world. Regulators differ as to records required, the transferability of engineering changes and in diferent equipment required in some jurisdictions.

EASA and FAA require Form 1 or 8130 for on-condition parts for two or three years. Other regulators may re-

quire these documents for every part over a longer period. “I need it for all parts because the aircraft may go anywhere in the world,” Ryan emphasizes.

If the form is missing or lost, a wasteful component overhaul is required.

Lack of standardized, digitized records creates problems. Paper documents on older aircraft fill 50 to 60 boxes, and handling them is expensive.

EASA and FAA have some provisions for digital records, but digital record formats are far from universal.

EASA requires equipage for Sesar’s air trafc management and navigation, while North America and Asia do not.

Transferring between regions therefore mandates this modification as part of the lease transfer.

Ryan says even the same national regulatory agency sometimes applies diferent inspection standards to different airlines, being stricter with smaller carriers than with long-established majors.

Even with proper documents, components may have to be overhauled before they are due. Leases generally require that all components on an aircraft have at least 6,000 hr., 4,000 cycles and 24 months left on them.

Equivalent to a C check interval, these minimums assure the next operator that a component does not need to be removed before the aircraft goes into the hangar for a heavy check. “It’s pretty standard; the next guy gets it new like you did,” Ryan notes.

Engines, APUs and landing gear may have to be removed for overhaul, depending on aircraft age. Landing gear are overhauled based on calendar time, APUs based on condition revealed in borescope inspection and engines according to usage.

Airlines generally plan well for engine

Lease-return planning should ideally start when the contract begins, but it must start at least a year before return.

SANTOS DUMONT

MRO16

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

Passion for Support AgustaWestland is growing its world-class support and training QHWZRUN DV WKH JOREDO KHOLFRSWHU Ă HHW H[SDQGV Working with all of our customers, we are delivering innovative VXSSRUW DQG WUDLQLQJ VROXWLRQV WR PD[LPLVH HIĂ€ FLHQF\ DYDLODELOLW\ and operational success.

(YHU\WKLQJ ZH GR ZH GR ZLWK SDVVLRQ.

LEADING THE FUTURE agustawestland.com

MRO Edition

OPERATIONS

BOEING CONCEPT

GE Capital Aviation Services’ portfolio includes 1,600 aircraft, including the Boeing 777-300ER.

overhauls, as these are costly. But when an engine comes of-wing for overhaul, it takes 60 to 90 days. Aircraft and original engines must generally be reunited before moving on to the next operator.

Ryan estimates that major systems like engines have to be removed from the aircraft about 40% percent of the time.

GE and CFM Services tailor longterm engine support agreements to make it easier for carriers to enter or exit when an aircraft changes operators. And CFM has introduced Portable Maintenance for Leasing (PML) for continuously leased aircraft.

PMLs allow small and mid-sized operators to pay maintenance reserves once, not twice, to obtain the protection of OEM hourly support. GECAS and one carrier have signed up so far,

and five other airlines are interested.

Ryan says PML may help operators financially, but it does not afect treatment of engines at lease return.

As with APUs, landing gear and other components, the next operator must be given fresh equipment with plenty of life left in it.

Failure to plan for all these requirements leads to inadequate records or insufcient maintenance, and the deficiencies must be remedied. Ryan reckons a well-planned lease return should take only six to eight weeks and cost his own company only 120 person-days of efort. But ill-planned returns can take six months to a year, and can be very costly for the lessee. “At $300,000 per month, that’s up to $3.6 million, on top of the maintenance,” Ryan notes.

Enda Clarke, chief technical ofcer at Santos Dumont, strongly agrees with Ryan. “The first major issue is planning.” Clarke says planning should ideally start when the lease begins, but must start at least a year before return.

“They have to look in detail at the redelivery conditions, what maintenance has to occur and what qualifying maintenance events are,” Clarke stresses.

The first object of solid return planning is to meet minimum redelivery conditions. Carriers also can seek to meet somewhat higher standards by drawing on their maintenance reserves; that is, they deposit MRO reserves with the lessor, and are allowed to draw some of them back if they meet certain aboveminimum conditions. “Go to the lessor, be open and honest,” Clarke urges.

“There are cost savings to be had.”

Some operators start planning for return three months out, thinking it requires an ordinary C check. Clarke says there is much more to be done.

Additional work may include removal

THE CHALLENGE OF GLOBAL CHANGE I ndustry groups are certainly aware of end-of-lease challenges. IATA sees three major structural challenges in transferring aircraft at lease-end, according to Chris Markou, assistant director of engineering and environment.

First, difering regulatory requirements among jurisdictions complicates and delays moving aircraft to operators in diferent countries. Second, lack of standardization and clarity in lease-return documentation causes delays and increases cost. Finally, continued reliance on paper documentation makes aircraft transfer slower and more costly.

IATA is working with ICAO to promote global acceptance of electronic records, but “it is a slow process,” Markou acknowledges. He says airlines and leasing companies are eager to standardize and digitize documents, and a few of these are pioneering new methods.

Airframe OEMs are critical to stan-

MRO18

dardized and digitized records, as they create digital birth records of aircraft and parts and strongly influence supply chains. With OEM leadership, airlines, lessors, MROs and suppliers could continue to expand digital record-keeping.

Markou urges supply-chain participants to harmonize digital records to ensure parts and aircraft can be transferred seamlessly. “Records harmonization is a focus area,” Markou stresses.

Agreeing on a common checklist of requirements during redelivery would dramatically simplify aircraft transfers.

Markou says agreement is most necessary on back-to-birth traceability of life-limited parts (LLP), repair documentation, certification and support documentation. “These are typical areas of misunderstanding between airlines and leasing companies,” he observes.

To meet these and other challenges, IATA has formed the Aircraft Leasing

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

Advisory Group, a forum for discussion and sharing best practices. IATA has published its own “Guidance and Best Practices for Aircraft Leases,” but even common solutions must recognize that each airline and lessor has its own business model.

Others are more impatient. Nonuniform, paper-based lease documents cost the industry $1 billion annually, notes Michael Denis, vice president of FlatIron Solutions. He says technology is available and ASD standards for XML documentation will soon be available to support standardized, digitized documents. “The problem is will and regulation.”

The will to make the change is weak, because no one party pays much of that $1 billion—even a giant like American Airlines, which will transfer 1,400 aircraft in and out over the next decade. And there are up-front costs to conversion.

Required data is similar under EASA,

AviationWeek.com/mro

This Cathay Pacific Airways Boeing 777-300ER is leased through ILFC.

FAA and Transport Canada regulation, due to bilateral agreements. Elsewhere, diferences persist. Even in the U.S., some primary maintenance inspectors still insist on “dirty fingerprints,” Denis notes. Fortunately, “the world is following EASA.” That should mean XML documentation according to ASD standards. And new aircraft should set the pace. Denis says most OEMs are going this way for their new models. The engine makers have adopted the new ASD standards.

Airbus did not for the A380, but will for the A350. Bombardier’s CSeries will, as will the Mitsubishi Regional Jet and, probably, Embraer’s E2 jets. The Boeing 787 is not on the new standards, but Denis thinks this may change when Boeing starts delivery of its KC-46 tanker, which will require the latest ASD standards.

If Boeing joins the ASD movement, that also may give standardization a critical push. c

AviationWeek.com/mro

BOEING

of engines, APUs and landing gear.

Engines are generally reunited with aircraft. APUs and landing gear may not have to be, but it is desirable.

Engines require at least borescope inspection, maximum power assurance (MPA) runs and tests of exhaust gas temperature (EGT). Return checks on airframes can include re-inspection of structural repairs, cosmetic fixes, overhauling seating and repainting.

“These things can take an extra week, or $100,000,” Clarke notes. “Planning for them is critical.”

Components generally need to have 24 months left to overhaul, and certification tags. “If you lost the tag, you must overhaul or replace the component,” Clarke says.

Clarke sees programs like CFM’s PML as increasingly prevalent, noting that Rolls-Royce ofers a similar product. He hopes for benefits. “It sounds good in principle, but it’s new, only three or four years old.” And PML does not change redelivery conditions. “Engines

Nervous about choosing the right repair center?

Relax. Go with Aero.

In today’s ever changing avionics market, you have to know what sets your business apart from the rest. Reliability is the reputation we have earned for providing outstanding quality repairs to regional and commercial aircraft operators. If you’re working with an MRO that cannot provide reliable repairs, you need to ask yourself:

ARE YOU WORKING WITH THE BEST?

RELIABILITY EXPERIENCE

QUALITY REPAIRS SUPPORT

Choose Aero to be your partner in component repairs. Our experience, reliability, quality repairs and support are not just words, they are how we have built and sustained our 46 year commitment to the avionics community.

WWW.AEROINST.COM

716.694.7060

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO19

MRO Edition

OPERATIONS

should still have 4,000 flight hours left and pass their borescope and EGT tests.”

Clarke says the global regulatory environment also makes lease return more difcult. “Europe has air trafc control equipage requirements, others don’t. China requires head-up displays.

These are high-cost modifications.”

Peach Airlines leases this Airbus A320 from GE Capital Aviation Services.

AIRBUS/P.MASCLET

Owners pay for these modifications, but they are most efciently done during redelivery checks, another reason for collaborative planning by lessor and lessee.

Different aviation authorities seek diferent documents and follow diferent procedures. “Some let aircraft come into their country on a temporary registration, then do a full inspection when it arrives,” Clarke says. “Others come in and do a week of inspection in the exporting country, which causes headaches.” Like Ryan, Clarke sees diferent inspection approaches used even by staf within the same country.

Clarke believes globally accepted digital documentation would help “hugely” in easing burdens. European carriers are moving ahead with digitized records, but China and Southeast Asia, the fastest-growing aviation markets, lag behind. “We are running a hybrid system of paper and digital records now and not saving money. But we must standardize first, then digitize.” Santos Dumont is working with IATA on standardization and digitization, but Clarke is not sure things will change much in the next 5-10 years.

Tony Diaz, president of CIT Commercial Air, cites different national regulatory requirements for maintenance, technical status and records as a major cost driver. Just reviewing new national requirements before transfer takes time and money and makes transitions more difcult. Uniform regulation would ease transfers, he argues.

EASA and FAA are more closely aligned than authorities elsewhere, “but even these are not perfectly synchronized,” Diaz notes. Diferent document needs flow from diferent requirements or enforcement methods. Aligning requirements and enforcement would thus remove this problem.

Diaz says it is unfortunate there is still no standardized, digitized record template. “It’s on the way and overdue.

This area cries out for standardization.”

Lacking standard templates, all parties require documenting everything to avoid risks when moving assets.

Diaz urges the industry to move toward clearly defined international regulations—one template for documents and one standard for parts. But he expects the path will be a long one. c Tap here in the digital MRO edition for our guide to major airframe and engine leasing companies or go to AviationWeek.com/Leasing

MRO20

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

For better health, it pays to see a specialist.

Boeing Airplane Health Management (AHM) provides comprehensive monitoring and analysis of airplane performance to ensure efďŹ cient maintenance operations. Utilizing advanced analytics, AHM software anticipates and detects component failure, immediately alerting Maintenance, Operations and executive functions and recommending fact-based solutions. The result is a healthy eet that spends less time on the ground and more time in the air. AHM, designed for the digital airline.

www.boeing.com/boeingedge/informationservices

MRO Edition

AVIONICS

Chasing ‘No Fault Found’

very hard to gain even incremental progress. Others don’t try very hard.

Jim Saltigerald is an Air Wisconsin reliability analyst who is active in drafting the next version of Arinc 672.

“Speaking from an airline perspective, in some circles NFFs are regarded as an unavoidable phenomenon, whose financial impact is less than that of trying to find NFF reduction remedies,” he says.

Saltigerald disagrees with this passiveness. He estimates that avionics components removed as faulty for any reason and found NFF in airline shops can be half or more of avionics components sent to shops if no corrective actions are taken. Based on experience at Air Wisconsin, he believes that rate can be cut by half or two-thirds.

To do that, Saltigerald recommends initially focusing on low-hanging, or

Better data analytics, fault isolation and predictive maintenance tools target rogue avionics units Henry Canaday Washington

Air Wisconsin designated a core team from flight operations, maintenance control, line operations, component management and shop operations to deal with No Fault Founds.

R

AIR WISCONSIN

epairing or replacing avionics components is hardly the biggest cost in maintenance. Avionics do not wear out regularly like some other aircraft systems. They just break down, often unexpectedly.

Unexpected maintenance is more expensive than scheduled repairs. And there is another frustrating maintenance problem that seems to afict avionics components disproportionately.

An avionics line replaceable unit may be removed because a pilot or mechanic finds something faulty in its performance. But when it gets back to the shop, it tests as perfectly good, or is “No Fault Found.” These NFFs cost labor time to remove, logistics costs to move—often long distances—expensive time to test on costly equipment and require burdensome increases in inventories. Far worse, NFFs may cause very expensive delays or flight cancellations, apparently for no good reason.

MRO22

NFFs are common in avionics and can be a major portion of components sent to shops for inspection. A numerically smaller problem is the really bad behavers. Sometimes called “rogue” units, these are components sent to shops repeatedly and frequently for exactly the same reason, but they always perform like stars on the test bench.

The entire industry has been fighting NFFs and hunting rogue units for some time. Effective approaches require the collaboration of many parties, the airlines that remove NFF units, the internal or third-party shops that test them and manufacturers of both individual components and the aircraft of which they are parts.

Arinc 672, “Guidelines for the Reduction of NFF,” lays out the problem in conceptual terms. But NFFs and rogues must be tracked to their causal lairs by extremely detailed practical steps. Some airlines and shops work

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

high-cost, NFF fruit. Concentrate first on NFF items that cost a lot, even if they are infrequent. Next, work on NFFs that are low-cost but frequent.

The last priority is the low-cost, lowremoval frequency NFFs. “Don’t chase stuf that has no value, you want to get the biggest bang for the buck.”

Air Wisconsin began using this three-tiered approach in 2005. It first found the top 10 NFFs in terms of total cost to its operations. Seven of the 10 had double-digit removal rates annually, up to 29 NFF removals per year for a single component type. The carrier has reduced those rates to four to six removals per year. Now only four out of its 10 worst NFFs are removed 15-20 times per year. The rest are in the single-digit NFFs. So progress can be made, but it’s not easy. Better troubleshooting helps.

Saltigerald says NFF problems can trace to the piece-part level, the linereplaceable-unit level, the system level or the aircraft level.

Air Wisconsin designated a core team to deal with NFFs, based at its headquarters and linked to the entire maintenance environment. Members came from flight operations, maintenance control, line operations, component management and shop operations.

AviationWeek.com/mro

OUR EXPERIENCE DRIVES YOUR EXCELLENCE.

:KHQ ZKDW PDWWHUV LV ¿QHO\ WXQHG HYHU\WKLQJ ZRUNV ,EHULD¶V PHUJHU ZLWK %ULWLVK $LUZD\V KDV PDGH XV VWURQJHU 2XU WHFKQLFLDQV KDYH PRUH WKDQ \HDUV RI H[SHULHQFH DQG DUH H[SHUWV LQ WKHLU ¿HOG :LWK RXU H[WHQGHG SURGXFW UDQJH DQG MRLQW UHVRXUFHV ZH FDQ RIIHU \RX WKH KLJK TXDOLW\ VHUYLFH WKDW \RX GHPDQG STRONGER TOGETHER.

Iberia Maintenance. Commercial Direction. $GROIR 6XiUH] 0DGULG %DUDMDV $LUSRUW /D 0XxR]D (GLÀFLR (1' 28042 Madrid.España. Phone: + 34 91 587 48 27 maintenance@iberia.es / www.iberiamaintenance.com British Airways Engineering: Technical Block C - Vanguard Way. Heathrow Airport. Hounslow. TW6 2JA bae@ba.com / web: www.ba-mro.com

Members de

MRO Edition

AVIONICS

The team had five core members. They did not work full-time on NFF, but met weekly to address NFF problems. Other experts were also tapped. “You have to have a structured approach,” Saltigerald insists.

Arinc 672 gave NFF staf a common language and a common matrix to help locate root causes. Common language is essential because solving many NFFs involves at least three parties: an airline, airframe OEM and component OEM. A structured approach and core team institutionalize NFF experience. “You need to build a knowledge base and good documentation because you don’t want one employee to take all the NFF knowledge when he leaves,” Saltigerald says.

Data on removals is essential. He says it should contain as many relevant parameters and cover as long a history as possible, back to birth if feasible. Airlines usually have the most important data, but component OEMs do not always get this data to help design out NFFs in the future. Contract language or mutual interest should ensure necessary data are shared.

Air Wisconsin was especially concerned with rogue units.

“Rogue units can ruin an inventory,” Saltigerald says. “Good parts chase rogues and mean time between unscheduled removals [MTBUR] sufers.”

NFFs and rogues can occur in any avionics area. “Anything with buttons you touch and moving parts can be in the top 10,” Saltigerald notes. “But sometimes it’s computer chips and PC boards that you are not even touching. Each NFF situation is diferent and dynamic.”

Saltigerald has high hopes for the future. He says good work

MRO24

is being done on electrical wiring interconnection systems (EWIS) to find factors that contribute to NFFs and hiddenfailure modes. He hopes RFID tagging will alleviate some problems by recording part and serial numbers, how long a part has been on an aircraft and possibly past findings by mechanics.

Other technology also looks promising. Better data analytics, fault isolation, troubleshooting and predictive maintenance

AIRBUS SEEKS AIRLINE-OEM COLLABORATION A

irframe OEMs have the power—and incentive—to play a major role in resolving NFFs. Airbus’s NFF policy for A320s, A330s and A340s seeks to ensure that when avionics components show an error, all applicable maintenance actions and memory reading are done to identify the root cause of a fault message and avoid unnecessary removals. Thus, if a removed component is shipped to its supplier with all required supporting data and tests NFF, test costs will not be charged to the airline.

The decision on whether to remove a part is made by the airline. When a component is turned in, its OEM or the OEM’s authorized repair station contacts the airline to learn the reasons for removal and obtain historical data. Airbus may get involved to ensure all causes are documented, resolve interface issues and maintain its NFF policy.

Responsibilities are very specific. Airlines must supply data including the initiating pilot, maintenance or post-flight reports, results of built-in test equipment (BITE) tests, troubleshooting data or return-to-service tests and historical data on all its NFFs. Airlines must also follow Airbus’s flight crew operating manual, operation engineering bulletins and maintenance recommendations. They should keep maintenance records by component serial number. If the same component is NFF three times in a short period—typically 12 months—the airline should send it to the OEM for in-depth investigation. Rogue units can also be spotted with historical records.

Airbus’s avionics OEMs must keep historical data by serial number of all components repaired in their shops. Data must include warranty history, total repair history, reasons for removal, tests, NFFs, modifications and all work performed.

The OEM should also do the in-depth investigation of highfrequency NFFs. This policy applies to avionics electronic and electric equipment, but not to proximity switches, pressure transducers, circuit breakers and hydraulic, mechanical and engine parts.

The Airbus policy at least reduces airline NFF costs. Over time, it should also reduce NFFs, yield better understanding of centralized systems on the aircraft and greater understanding of NFFs by both airlines and suppliers and improve the troubleshooting manual. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

The No Fault Found rate is about 5% of avionics components turned in for repair, but AFI KLM E&M hopes to decrease that rate to 1-3%. tools should help. So should better flight data recorders that can download data in real time on exactly what pilots are seeing on cockpit displays. “Knowing the phase of flight when certain faults appear would help,” Saltigerald says.

He also hopes the next revision of Arinc 672, due out in 2015 or 2016, will help by providing a common syllabus of what everyone should know in dealing with NFFs. Online training in NFF management might also help. And Saltigerald would like to see innovators, designers and engineers collaborate more closely on preventing future NFFs. Major airline-afliated MROs also have extensive experience with NFFs, and some have made dramatic progress. Arinc 672 is still the best guide in principle for dealing with the problem, according to Taco Vingerhoed, avionics and accessories director at KLM Engineering and Maintenance.

“The challenge is putting principle into practice,” Vingerhoed says.

The three steps urged by Arinc are assembling complete data on all NFFs, tracing their root causes and taking corrective actions. The AFI-KLM exec says the data are generally available; for example, on part number, tail number, serial number, flight hours and shop findings. And corrective actions are usually straightforward after root causes are identified. The hard part is finding those root causes.

Vingerhoed manages avionics repairs for Air France, KLM and all the airlines whose components depend on the MRO’s pool support. Avionics NFFs are now below five percent of all avionics components turned in for repair, and this portion does not difer much according to whether components come from external or internal customers. The NFF rate is down from seven years ago, but is still well above the 1-3% Vingerhoed is aiming at. “But we are very confident we will reach that figure in the near future.”

The top-three NFFs now are engine control units (ECU), display electronics units (DEU) and air data inertial reference units (ADIRU). To find root causes for these NFFs, the MRO collaborates with both internal and external cus-

AviationWeek.com/mro

AIR FRANCE INDUSTRIES KLM ENGINEERING & MAINTENANCE/PATRICK DELAPIERRE

MAXIMIZE YOUR FLIGHT TIME LOCTITE® ready-to-use solutions for composite repair

Henkel offers you innovative, composite repair solutions in ready-to-use packaging for your MRO requirements: > Bonding > Wet lay-up > Out-of-autoclave > Specialty repairs Contact us or our authorized global distribution network to find out more about our off-the-shelf solutions.

www.henkel.com/aerospace

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO25

MRO Edition

AVIONICS

Arinc 672, “Guidelines for the Reduction of NFF,” lays out the No Fault Found problem in conceptual terms, but tracking them still requires extremely detailed steps.

AIR WISCONSIN

tomers. As AFI-KLM usually charges a flight-hour rate to its external airline customers, the MRO bears NFF costs and so has an intense interest in reducing the NFF rate. It obtains data from

external customers and talks to their managers when investigating NFFs. Modern IT systems help a lot with data, but investigation of root causes requires man-hours of work, much of

The Future of Aviation Just Got Brighter!

INTRODUCING

the only FAA Approved Drop-in Replacement LED PAR64 Landing Light available today – developed by Hoffman Engineering. < Improved visibility and performance over lifetime. < The only LED PAR64 available that meets SAE ARP6402 Spec. < LED light rated to last 500x longer than incandescent – resulting in significant power, labor and cost-savings.

Exclusively distributed by

Jamaica Aerospace Company A member of the Jamaica Bearings Group

(US) 954-447-4700 www.jamaicabearings.com

MRO26

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

it by highly skilled and well-paid engineers. Thorough investigations also require help from avionics OEMs, and Vingerhoed says most cooperate fully.

Especially at annual aviation maintenance conferences, techs and engineers exchange information and look at common problems. Nevertheless, “not every OEM is as cooperative as it could be,” Vingerhoed says. “I want open books from OEMs.” AFI-KLM E&M obtains avionics testing software from OEMs and usually uses this software. But where OEM software is unavailable or too slow, the MRO may develop its own. For example, some OEM software requires 48 hr. for a thorough component test. The MRO wants to test as fast as possible, so it developed software that needs only six hours to validate results. “It’s in our interest to make testing as fast and cheap as possible,” Vingerhoed stresses.

For almost all NFFs, the MRO analyzes data and looks for root causes using simple methods. But some avionics components show up as NFFs three or more times in 18 months. This one percent of NFFs prompts much more labor-intensive investigations.

Here the MRO will look at the station, the pilots, cabin crew, logistics, the whole chain of responsibility and possible influence. It first takes a highlevel look and, if that does not yield conclusions, goes a step deeper and finally—if necessary—a further step.

This last step may look at crews and staf at each station. “Normally, we do not go that far,” Vingerhoed says. The full, three-step investigations are done one to three times per year.

Root causes fall into three main categories: 60% originate in the component itself, 30% in the aircraft and 10% in AFI-KLM E&M’s own shops.

Vingerhoed hopes that new-generation aircraft will reduce the NFF rate, as their avionics components have more self-testing software built in. But KLM does not fly the 787 yet, and its only customer operating the 787 has been doing so for only a year and nine months, so there is not enough data to know if that hope has been realized. c

AviationWeek.com/mro

AVIATION WEEK EXECUTIVE ROUNDTABLE

MRO IT: Ensuring Success on IT Implementation & Adoption Helen S. Kang • Madrid, Spain • October 6, 2014 With newer, connected aircraft in today’s airspace, aviation MRO (maintenance, repair, and overhaul) is demanding faster and real-time intelligence for better reliability and predictive maintenance. However, the tools necessary to deliver the increased amount of information are met with hindrances. Information technology investments go through lengthy approvals and technology adoption, especially mobility, is faced with resistance to new processes and utilization.

Although maintenance organizations operate “low-risk, low-cost” approaches, by the time IT projects are approved, implemented, adopted and integrated, the technology may already have gone through several upgrades due to rapid technology advancements. In addition, the training for the technology may also be outdated. According to a recent Aviation Week/IATA study, airlines are willing to invest in new MRO IT systems, but will it be in time to maximize on the potential of their investments?

In order to gain the fullest ROIs on technology, it must be quickly adopted and integrated successfully to take maximum advantage of their capabilities. With every dollar invested carefully scrutinized, organizations must ensure the success of their IT investments quickly and optimally.

Determining approaches on efficiently and successfully execute MRO technology adoptions with minimal disruptions were the foci of an October 6 Aviation Week Executive Roundtable held at IFEMA in Madrid, Spain. The goals of the roundtable were to benchmark successes from past implementations and adoptions, and conceive approaches and progress metrics for ongoing and future IT projects.

The roundtable was hosted by Fernando Ferreira Matos, Head of Information Technologies at TAP Maintenance & Engineering, and Lee Ann Tegtmeier, Aviation Week’s Chief Editor MRO. The meeting was sponsored by The Boeing Company.

This was the seventh MRO IT roundtable and the fourth for the European region*. Previous meetings determined that mobility has become the catalyst on moving technology projects forward. The successes from these implementations and integrations may provide a benchmarking template for IT business cases and justifications for investment.

However, short-term goals and key performance indicators must be clearly outlined for successful technology adoption and effective change management.

Organizations participating in the October 6 roundtable were AerData; ANA Systems Co., Ltd.; Armac Systems; DVB Bank SE; EGYPTAIR Maintenance and Engineering; HEICO; IATA; IBM; NORDAM; Pan Air Líneas Aéreas; Pratt & Whitney; Primera Air; TAP Maintenance & Engineering; TUNISAIR; Turkish Airlines; Turkish Technic; and Vueling.

Roundtable participants divided into four work groups that were challenged to respond to a set of questions that focused on the following topics: • Measuring success on MRO IT projects.

• Turning data into intelligent information and ultimately action.

• Mobile technology adoption and integration strategies.

• Technologies that should be developed in the near-term.

The 2014 Aviation Week MRO IT Executive Roundtable participants determined that a crucial and significant factor in the success of IT adoption is leadership buy-in and commitment. Culture and change management issues during mobile technology adoption can be alleviated through executive support. Increased connectivity to the airplane brings bigger data, which needs to be quickly translated into intelligence. Two pivotal approaches to making the increasing data applicable and actionable are simplification and visualization.

KEY FINDINGS: • Leadership awareness was identified as a critical component to the success of MRO IT projects. Although this is more of a business challenge, rather than IT issue, having the business buy-in can address multiple concerns

Sponsored by AviationWeek.com /mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

S1

AVIATION WEEK EXECUTIVE ROUNDTABLE

MRO IT: Ensuring Success on IT Implementation & Adoption such as standards, culture and talent.

• A primary hindrance to mobile technology adoption was the culture and change management of transitioning the team/organization to new processes utilizing these tools.

• A top priority and near-term goal of mobility was to have “paperless” mechanics and engineers working on the aircraft, equipped with wireless devices and real-time connectivity.

• Simplification is key to making data actionable.

• Visualization with pictures and images has been a highly effective method of translating data into actionable information.

Details of topical conversations in the work groups follow.

ENSURING SUCCESS ON MRO IT PROJECTS

Characteristics and approaches of successful MRO IT projects.

- Modular approach – important to consider IT project and be productive.

- Prototyping.

- Minimize customization for MRO because they need specific applications. More standardized/organized system.

- Need champions to monitor with steering committees within organizations.

- Developing customized product, or purchasing off-the-shelf. OR buying off-the-shelf and customize.

- Adaptable to accommodate future needs.

- Be willing to re-engineer business processes.

- Clear strategy (knowing where you are).

Identifying and overcoming challenges.

- Data migration (data quality) – a lot of man-hours and no hub to do it correctly.

- Basic change management.

- Executive support / continuity.

- IT solution vs. business process – can be conflicting when making the business case.

- Strategically having training at the right time, instead of too early.

- Need overarching strategy that ties it all together.

Measuring and determining success.

- On-time delivery. (Day 1: ship and invoice parts. If you do not have the right IT system, you cannot process, ship and invoice the right part.)

- Clear KPIs (Key Performance Indicators): o TAT o Cost o Profitability (EBITDA %) o Inventory o Technician utilization – what percent of technician time is for the customer? o Flexibility – IT system that can adapt to the business process.

- User acceptance.

TURNING DATA INTO INTELLIGENT INFORMATION AND ULTIMATELY ACTION Translating data into intelligence and action.

- IT and business continuing to work together and various steps in the project - integrated team monitors usage throughout the project to adapt accordingly. o Usage; deliver on time.

- Solution idea: Predictive/suggestive pop-ups. o Ex. after searching for an item on Amazon, subsequent banner ads contain pertinent items based on your search → Applying to engineer/tasks – something similar for maintenance engineers to suggest tasks.

- Have the system constantly improve by learning various troubleshooting tasks. Track evaluations and predict AOG situations.

- Need to find a way to integrate all reliability systems of the whole aircraft, and prepare the tech before aircraft lands.

Sponsored by S2 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com /mro

AVIATION WEEK EXECUTIVE ROUNDTABLE

MRO IT: Ensuring Success on IT Implementation & Adoption - More data but not enough capacity to identify the key information in the data. o E-enabled aircraft -> dealing with the increased amount of data.

• New team/steering committee/working group that goes across all the departments → increased understanding and efficiency.

• Operations control + maintenance control.

• Collects, analyzes and filters data.

• Data Security. o Collaboration→ fleet and industry data.

Challenges/hindrances on using data effectively.

- Change management.

- Lack of integration.

- Irrelevant data.

Successful data translation methods.

- Visualization – utilizing the system with pictures/images, instead of text.

- Devices that users are already familiar with.

- Display of complex processes (ex. parts supplier has big TV screen on the floor with priorities of orders).

Proven approaches to making data actionable.

- Make the platform send the data.

- Balance right amount of data.

- Based on certain health monitoring, suggested tasks for the engineer.

- Trends across fleets – data collaboration.

- Simplification – use the traffic light system on the dashboard as labels.

- Closing the loop – making sure the action is executed. Warning alerts drive notification AND action.

Near-term approaches to make information more efficient and delivered faster.

- Mobile – putting devices to transfer information in the hands of the people on the front line.

- Visualization of the data.

- Connectivity – aircraft and ground system synchronization.

- Trust – how to trust the data you are receiving, as well as the people who are handling the data. Need back-ups. o Trust in flight ops data (ex. automated landing systems), but is it there for MRO? In flight ops, the data/information go through multiple checkpoints due to processes/steps in the system before information gets into in the hands of the pilot.

- Condition-based systems.

MOBILE TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION AND INTEGRATION STRATEGIES Enablement with mobile technologies.

- Real-time communication – line mechanics equipped with tablets to video-chat with back office for advice.

- Documentation – access to information quickly.

- Material/part request in real-time.

- Centralized reporting/troubleshooting (e-logbook; tech log integration).

- Paperless pilots → mechanics. Why not mechanics? Does it make sense to have separate systems? o Licensed engineers directly at the aircraft, instead of administrative tasks (i.e. reporting).

• Line Maintenance MORE Challenges to mobile technology adoption, and solutions to Important overcome them.

• Hangar Maintenance - Connectivity – connection/bandwidth at the airports, and mobile device management issues. Devices can be • Shop docked for updates, but how about real-time updates when on-site at the aircraft?

• Desk Office - Culture.

- Regulatory – dependent on local authorities.

• Vacation Less

Sponsored by AviationWeek.com /mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

S3

AVIATION WEEK EXECUTIVE ROUNDTABLE

MRO IT: Ensuring Success on IT Implementation & Adoption Phased approach for an efficient, successful mobile integration.

1) Mission analysis – determine what you want to improve with implementation.

2) Business process definition – analyze your processes, and how mobility would fit into the process. ➢ Quantify the purported improvements. Determine costs and project/implementation leader.

3) After determining what would be improved through mobility, define the implementation challenges (connectivity, hardware, price, unions, regulatory) and subsequent solutions.

4) Proof of Concept (PoC).

5) Go / No-Go decision.

6) Implementation.

Determine where technology should be developed in the short-term.

1

IP / Security / Sharing vs. Not Sharing (Commercial).

2

Data → Standards (Spec2000, RFID, Authentication).

- Expounded (IATA e-initiative).

Suppliers

Org.

Org.

3

In-house capability • Value – Project management, DSS (using big data), (down arrow) costs, compliance, transferability (asset lifecycle management).

• Stakeholders – OEM, MRO, Airline, Regulator (EASA, FAA, etc.).

• Challenges – Culture, Interoperability, ERP/MRO IT System, Processes to use data.

Biggest drivers and justifiers on upgrades or new technology adoption.

- Compliance - IT always gets funded when it is a safety issue because it has executive buy-in.

- ROI. Avoidance of a cost opportunity.

- Interoperability – all the stakeholders to work and communicate effectively.

Determining where the next IT investment needs to be.

- Governance framework (i.e. data sharing, data security, data standards) is critical as it is needed for integration across the supply chain. o When has governance lead IT, they only catch up?

- Challenges around the standard of data, shared vs not shared. Less about the technology and more about the support process (standardization and governance). * For findings and reports on past meetings, please go to http://mediakit.aviationweek.com/ExecutiveRoundtable/ The Boeing Company is the world's leading aerospace company, the largest manufacturer of commercial jetliners and military aircraft and a global space technology leader. Boeing is the largest U.S. exporter with total 2013 company revenues of $86.6 billion.

Boeing Commercial Aviation Services delivers customers a competitive edge through industry-leading support and services. This is the Boeing Edge; providing aroundthe-clock support for Boeing airplanes throughout the entire product lifecycle with solutions to give customers every competitive advantage-directly from the OEM. The Boeing Edge is all about customer success. It brings customers what no other single service company can.

Focusing on information technology services and solutions, Boeing combines technology leadership, OEM knowledge and Boeing fleet data, to help customers create their digital airline, connecting people to the information and systems they need to perform to their full capabilities. Boeing addresses customers’ constant need for integration and optimization of information. It provides solutions using data, software, analytics, IT infrastructure and e-commerce – and will connect, integrate and operate advanced next-generation Boeing airplanes. To find out more go to http://www.newairplane.com/boeingedge

Sponsored by S4 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com /mro

MRO Edition

COMPOSITES

Bolt-on Repairs Views diverge on bonded repairs to primary composite structures Victoria Moores Madrid

T

here is still some way to go before bonded repairs will be accepted on primary composite structures, according to executives speaking at Aviation Week’s MRO Europe Conference.

Regulators only allow bolt-on metal repairs to primary composite structures on the latest generation of aircraft— just like standard metallic-build versions—because of concerns over the strength, quality and durability of manually bonded repairs.

“There is still the debate between bonded and bolted repairs. We need both,” says James Kornberg, AFI KLM E&M aerostructures product and business development general manager.

While Lufthansa Technik is working with Airbus and other industry stakeholders to automate and standardize bonded composite repairs as part of the Composite Adaptable Inspection and Repair (CAIRE) project team (see sidebar), Kornberg is unconvinced. “It is very interesting, but practically this system cannot be used because it is not validated.

Today we don’t think it is necessary to have a robot to repair these aircraft,” he says.

Kornberg argues that in the field it is too tricky to get the

proper tooling for bonded repairs and recreate the conditions needed, so bolted repairs will continue to take the lead. “You cannot do bonded repair on very large areas. It is technically not possible, so there is a limit. It is case-by-case. You have the right to push for bonded repairs, but it will not always be possible.”

Bombardier’s director of engineering & component services Michael Curran agrees. “We’re doing a huge amount of work on bonded repairs. For instance, if something needs fixing during the manufacturing process it’s not going to be done with a bolted repair. But we have the advantage of clean rooms, autoclaves and perfect vacuums. The difculty is reproducing that in the field,” he says.

Both agreed that the prime objective is getting the aircraft back into service as quickly as possible, with a minimum cost for repairs, adding that bonded repairs lend themselves more to secondary structures such as nacelles and fan cowlings.

“You don’t want to touch it again. That works with bolted repairs. There is no limit to how many bolt-on repairs you could do,” says Curran. The metal fix, which carries a weight and strength penalty, will then fly with the aircraft until the end of its life, or until the structure is replaced. Curran described this as “fit and forget.”

Bombardier is establishing bolt-on repair procedures for the CSeries, testing potential events such as heat exposure and lightning strikes. “The big message to take out of this is we’re not going to be doing carbon-type repairs. These are metallic repairs that bolt onto the structure, which should make it easier for MROs and airlines. It is not necessary at this point to do carbon repairs everywhere,” he says. c

CAIRE ABOUT COMPOSITES B olt-on metal repairs to primary composite structures could become a thing of the past, as work to improve the acceptance and standardization of bonded repairs progresses.

Bolted repairs can be detrimental, cutting the composite structure’s residual strength by up to 50% and adding extra weight. “We have made the first step—not in convincing the authorities—but in increasing the reliability and acceptance of bonding as a repair method,” says Christian Sauer, Lufthansa Technik engineering manager for airframe-related component services, speaking at Aviation Week’s MRO Europe Conference.

“The only [primary structure] repair that is certifiable at the moment [for visible damage] is bolted, meaning that just like a standard metallic aircraft you put a bolted patch on it.

The problem is [that] bonding—which we believe is the best way to repair composite aircraft—is not allowed by the regulators,” he says.

This is because bonded repairs are largely done manually and it is hard to prove the strength, quality and durability of the joint without breaking it again. There is also a lack of specialized training for bonding, fueling regulators’ concerns, says Sauer.

“The quality of the repair depends on the skill of the mechanic. There is no system that can tell you how much it can

AviationWeek.com/mro

withstand. All of these uncertainties mean the authorities don’t allow us to do this on primary structures,” adds Sauer.

“What we need to do is take all uncertainties out of the process. We need an industry standard for bonding, which has started; but we are not there yet.”

Using technologies from the CAIRE project, Lufthansa Technik and its partners have developed an automated system for assessing, designing and repairing damage to composite structures. It optimizes the repair before scanning the surface for contaminants, grinding out the damaged material and creating the fix, which is applied manually. Afterwards, the new geometry can be checked to ensure all the dimensions have been met.

CAIRE also has been adapted from a stationary in-shop system to a mobile robot that can be secured to any surface using suckers. “You can move it where you want, and it can do this process wherever it is needed,” says Sauer.

This “very precise, very quick” automated process could replace the current system of manual layer-by-layer grinding to create a bonded fix, which lacks standardization and is extremely time-intensive—taking at least 60% longer than the automated process. Tests on the automatically produced repairs have proven they are 5-15% stronger than the manually ground alternative. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO31

MRO Edition

PAINT

Coatings Conglomerate Going Global Next steps could be in Asia, Middle East or OEM work Paul Seidenman San Francisco

W

ith its acquisition of Eirtech Aviation in June for an undisclosed sum, private equity firm Vance Street Capital is staking out a global presence in the commercial airliner exterior paint and interior refurbishment market. Eirtech is headquartered in Shannon, Ireland, and has paint facilities in Shannon, Dublin, Rome, and Ostrava in the Czech Republic.

The acquisition is the latest development in Vance Street Capital’s o n go i n g fo c u s on the aircraft painting business, which, within the past two and a half years, included the rollup of Costa Mesa, California-based Leading Edge Aviation Services and Associated Painters, headquartered in Spokane, Washington. The three companies will operate as components of International Aerospace Coatings Holdings, but retain their brand names and management, according to Brian Martin, a Vance Street Capital principal.

“Eirtech has a great management team that has done extremely well in Europe,” explains Martin. “It is an extremely process-driven company with a reputation for high-quality paint and interior refurbishment work, which we believe will be a nice growth area for the company.”

As Martin points out, Vance Street Capital also liked the fact that Eirtech was “targeting other parts of the world” for possible expansion, which he says “broadens the global footprint” of the three companies.

“Working together, Eirtech, Leading Edge and Associated Painters will provide a consistently superior product, and a global management platform to share their resources, best

MRO32

practices and processes,” he remarks.

Eirtech’s current four European centers, Martin notes, give customers the advantage of multiple locations in closer proximity to their aircraft, which reduces ferrying costs and ultimately turn times. The customer base, which includes commercial airlines, military and VVIP/head of state transport work, is expected to grow, and include both OEM and aftermarket opportunities.

along with reliable turn times, which we could leverage in new facilities as they grow,” says Cunningham. “That is what has encouraged us to look into the Middle East and Asian regions— and establish a footprint in the U.S.” Eirtech also expects to grow its aircraft interior design and installation business, says Cunningham, who notes that interior modification services will be introduced not only at new facilities but at those in the U.S. “All of that will happen in tandem with what we are doing at our European facilities.”

While most Eirtech customers are commercial airline operators, Cunningham confirms that airframe OEMs, and major MROs, will become increasingly important. Along with that, he notes a trend toward consolidation among aircraft painters. “Today, airlines want to deal with companies which can provide the capacity for fleet-wide painting, and at the same time they want to work with a single supplier.”

Airbus A320 in front of Eirtech Aviation’s facility at Ostrava, in the Czech Republic, the company’s first paint hangar outside Ireland.

EIRTECH

“We are doing a growing volume of OEM work, specifically on Boeing 787s, 767s, 777s and 737s,” Martin says. “In fact, I believe there is a great opportunity to get into more OEM work.”

Asked if there are any additional acquisitions in aircraft painting and refurbishing being considered, Martin reports that Vance Street Capital is always looking at deals that make strategic sense. “We got into this industry because we like the business models and growth processes of the companies, and we believe we can facilitate their growth, and expand globally.”

Niall Cunningham, Eirtech Aviation’s CEO, agrees. “We wanted to provide a global service, but concluded that we would get there faster if we aligned Eirtech with the aircraft painting companies that were under the Vance Street Capital umbrella,” he says.

Eirtech Aviation is evaluating onairport locations in the Middle East and Asia. “Based on our experience in Europe, there is growing demand for a consistently high-quality product,

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

The International Aerospace Coatings Holdings companies, he points out, now have 16 hangars at eight locations, which include four in the U.S. and four in Europe. “That gives those three companies the combined capacity to paint 33 aircraft at any given time, and as many as 1,000 per year,” Cunningham explains.

Consolidation is coming about, as demand for aircraft painting remains strong, according to Rogier van der Velde, senior service manager, engineering for SGI Aviation in Amsterdam. “There will always be healthy demand for aircraft painting slots, with much of it driven by the leasing companies.”

In fact, with the growth of operating leases, typically with 6-12-year terms, van der Velde says that aircraft are being transitioned from one operator to another at younger ages, thus requiring frequent repainting because of airline livery changes. “On the other side,” he cautions, airlines themselves are saving money on the frequencies of paint jobs and at the same time, new techniques allow paint to stay on an aircraft longer.” c

AviationWeek.com/mro

Engineering Castings Machining Coatings Repairs

Challenges come in all shapes and sizes. So do our solutions. Today, Chromalloy can help you do more for lessâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; from meeting tighter timelines and customer demands, to boosting production while reducing operational complexity and expense. Over the past 60-plus years Chromalloy has evolved into the only independent, non-OEM in the world UIBU QSPWJEFT FOHJOFFSJOH DBTUJOHT NBDIJOJOH DPBUJOHT BOE SFQBJST GPS FOHJOF DPNQPOFOUT JO B n FYJCMF DPTU FGGFDUJWF mannerâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;all from a single source. For commercial airlines, MROs and OEMs, it means problem solved.

Long live your engine.

For more information visit chromalloy.com

MRO Edition

ENGINE ANALYSIS

Growth Mode

As the CFM56 order book cools, the aftermarket heats up Sean Broderick Washington

C

FM’s new Leap engine family booked 1,393 orders in 2013—or 63 more than it took in for the CFM56. The figures mark the first time that the new model surpassed its predecessor in annual order book figures. While the Leap’s future is bright, it will take some time for the model to move past the venerable incumbent as an aftermarket revenue-generator.

Demand for more efcient narrowbody lift drove Airbus and Boeing to develop new versions of their successful A320 and 737 families, but demand for more immediate lift pushed them to raise production rates on the current versions. With the A320neo and 737 MAX still several years away from full

this year, and potentially doubling in about a decade. Capacity is not an issue: CFM joint venture partner General Electric says there are 45 shops with CFM56 capability, including 29 that handle second-generation engines. That is enough to handle about three times the current shop visit rate, meaning there is plenty of room to absorb the projected boost.

Safran, parent company of Snecma, which along with GE is a 50/50 partner in CFM, is banking on CFM56 aftermarket growth to help boost its bottom line. Safran aftermarket activity grew 19.2% in 2013, “mainly driven by overhauls for the latest CFM56 engines” as well as a boost in GE90 work, the French company said. The trend is expected to continue, with CFM56 spares revenue doubling from its 2010 levels— the recent low-point stemming from reduced flight activity triggered by the 2008-09 global recession—by 2020.

While Safran references spare parts revenue as an indicator of aftermarket activity, it is hesitant to use the figure alone as a primary benchmark. One reason: a shift in how new spares are consumed, especially in the CFM56 market. Several years ago, Safran noticed that its long-reliable spares forecasting model, based largely on the engine’s technical performance, was no longer matching up with reality. A 2011 study concluded that operator behavior was having much more of an influence on spares demand than before. Specific variables range from the explosion of low-cost operators that fly Boeing 737s—which are powered exclusively by CFM56s—or A320s with CFM56 engines, to the increasing utilization of used parts.

Safran’s revised, behavior-based forecasting model shows

CFM

With new engines rolling of the assembly line and many older powerplants still facing second or third shop visits, the CFM56 spares market has room for growth.

production—entry into service is slated for 2015 for the neo and 2017 for the MAX—operators are adding current-generation versions as fast as the manufacturers can build them.

This has helped push CFM56 deliveries to record levels. The 2012 figure of 1,442 engines produced was double that of 2002, and delivery figures have risen steadily since, topping 1,500 in 2013 and slated to reach 1,550 this year.

The production surge, combined with on-wing life exhibited by current-configuration, second-generation engines— CFM56-5s and -7s—means that about 40% of the nearly 20,000 CFM56s in service have yet to undergo initial shop visits, which usually take place from seven to nine years after entry into service. A Bernstein Research analysis earlier this year determined that 80% have yet to reach subsequent shop visits, which are more lucrative for service providers because of the amount of material needed to complete the overhauls.

“Much of the recent growth [in CFM56 aftermarket work] has been driven by second-generation CFM56 engines coming of wing for their first and second shop visit,” Bernstein noted in its report. Citing the trends, Bernstein projects a 9% compound annual growth rate in shop visits through 2019.

Industry estimates put annual shop visits at about 2,000

MRO34

that CFM56 spares demand will rise steadily until about 2025 before beginning to tail of. First-generation spares demand will fade out much more quickly, as aircraft being parked make more used parts available for the earliest CFM56s still flying.

Analysts at Canaccord Genuity estimate that as much as 90% of the spares demand for the early CFM56s is satisfied through used parts.

The market for newer CFM56 material is much smaller and should stay that way until A320neo and 737 MAX deliveries begin to supplant in-service aircraft powered by the newer engines. Safran calculates that less than 5% of the CFM56-5B and -7B spares demand is filled by used parts, and does not expect this to change for several years. When it does, the consortium will be well-positioned; CFM estimates that its branded used parts division, CFM Materials, has about 35% of the global market share of used current-generation CFM56 parts.

Safran’s civil aftermarket figures factor in long-term agreements that help drive spares revenue. Safran estimates that about 65% of CFM56 shop visits will either be done at one of its shops or under a service agreement.

Competing for work against independent providers, especially as engines mature, is seen as a benefit, the manufacturer maintains.

“Our goal is to be flexible and adapt our maintenance for each customer,” said GE Aviation Director of Service Marketing Bill Dwyer. From risk transfer to time-and-materials support, “our calling card is customization. Our goal is to let customers pick.” c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

DynAviation has been supporting our customers’ critical aviation needs worldwide for more than six decades. Our world-renowned maintenance and modification solutions—which include support for 200 types of aircraft and 70 engine types— ensure the highest level of operational readiness at all times.

Beyond aviation maintenance and PRGL¿ FDWLRQ, we provide overhaul, repair and support; air operations and transport; DLU¿ HOG PDQDJHPHQW, communication and QDYLJDWLRQ; DHULDO ¿ UH¿ JKWLQJ; and WUDLQLQJ. From rapidresponse field assignments to long-term engagements, our customers count on us for best-value solutions that deliver safety, reliability and mission success.

(ex·pe·ri·ence) ik sper e ns e

n. 1. world’s most comprehensive array of integrated aviation solutions 2. military and commercial aircraft support at 100 locations worldwide 3. more than 60 years’ experience delivering world-class aerospace, aviation and air operations services Synonym: DynAviation

DynAviation | DynLogistics | DynGlobal www.dyn-intl.com

MRO Edition

ENGINE ANALYSIS

Monitoring Structural Health Delta TechOps developing technology and framework to make structural health monitoring the next NDT Paul Seidenman San Francisco

D

elta TechOps is working on an innovative approach to airframe structural health monitoring (SHM) using embedded comparative vacuum monitoring (CVM) sensors to detect the formation of cracks in critical load-bearing structures.

Alex Melton, Delta TechOps nondestructive testing (NDT) program manager, points out that the goal is to integrate structural health monitoring into the regulatory framework so that the industry can use it. “SHM is the next level of NDT,” says Melton. “Using the sensors enables a fair amount of access to structures on the aircraft that are generally very difcult to access for a time-consuming, visual inspection,” he notes. “They will also eliminate the potential collateral damage risks, due to human factors, during an airframe inspection.”

Delta TechOps, teamed with Boeing, the FAA, Sandia National Laboratories, Structural Monitoring Systems, and Aerodyne Electronics Manufacturing Corp., won the 12th annual Better Way award for the First Commercial Aviation Application of Structural Health Monitoring at the Airlines for America and Society of Automotive Engineers 57th Annual A4A Non-Destructive Testing Forum in San Francisco.

The SHM program is funded by the FAA, with overall management by San-

dia National Laboratories, which operates the FAA Airworthiness Assurance Validation Center.

David Piotrowski, principal engineer at Delta TechOps Enabling Technologies Group, explains that the current focus of the SHM program is to move the technology from its prototype status into mainstream maintenance. “The technology has been there, but what we did not have is a clear pathway to go from prototype testing into mainstream maintenance, and give the industry an alternative inspection technique.”

Melton says that Delta TechOps is working with the FAA Transport Airplane Directorate—which is the customer—to provide guidance with the regulatory framework development, needed to integrate the use of CVM sensors into aircraft maintenance. In that regard, Delta TechOps will essentially “live through” the certification process for the SHM application. He predicts that as the regulatory picture becomes clear, CVM sensors will assume a greater role in the aircraft structural maintenance process. “This means, long term, there will be more on-condition maintenance of major structures.”

Melton adds that while the sensor technology for SHM is already in place, it represents “a different philosophy” involving structural NDT. “It will require an industry educa-

DELTA TECHOPS

MRO36

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

tion efort for it to gain acceptance.”

For crack detection, Delta TechOps installed three CVM sensors on the center wing box front spar shear fittings, at Body Station (STA) 540, on 10 of Delta Air Lines’ Boeing 737-700s in February and March. The 737-700 was selected because the center wing box is prone to high stress levels and, according to Piotrowski, “had known cracking issues,” as indicated by a Boeing service bulletin. The sensors, which are encased in Teflon tubes, weigh approximately 2 lb. Designed as a passive system, the sensors have what he called an array of embedded galleries to which a vacuum is applied.

Any leaking path of atmospheric pressure detected produces a measurable change in vacuum level, indicating the presence of a crack. If no crack is present, a vacuum is achieved.

The data is downloaded from the sensors via a handheld device during overnight checks, on what is currently a 90-day repetitive schedule. The objective is to produce the data package within 12-18 months of monitoring, consisting of 5-6 readings following installation on the aircraft. In total, 70 installed sensors would be involved, resulting in the generation of 350 data points, based on five checks.

The data from the sensors is being monitored and tracked in conjunction with performance tests at Sandia National Laboratories to identify aircraft structural maintenance items earlier and more efciently.

“We are collecting as many data points as possible in order to make sure that the system is working as it should be,” says Piotrowski. “When we get enough flight-test data, we will take it to the FAA and Boeing for certification, hopefully by the spring/ summer time period of 2015. Boeing is providing guidance, and we want them to bless the maintenance program changes that this will make possible.”

He hopes the work accomplished, “will serve as the blueprint” for the future implementation of SHM on commercial aircraft. c

Delta TechOps applied its crackdetecting sensors to the center wing box on 10 Delta Air Lines Boeing 737-700s.

AviationWeek.com/mro

Heat Treat Knowledge

Choose the best in brazing Ipsen experts explore aluminum brazing and compliance standards in technical guides.

Fundamentals of Aluminum Brazing Vacuum aluminum brazing is not only efficient, cost-effective and environmentally friendly, but also a careful balance of time, temperature and vacuum level. To ensure brazing success, these parameters must be controlled in a work environment utilizing sophisticated controls to ensure fast pumping, low parts per million of oxygen and exceptional temperature uniformity. For fully successful part brazing, following a routine maintenance program and adhering to proper joint design are also essential.

Aerospace Aluminum Brazing and Compliance Aerospace aluminum brazing has been around for decades, continuously evolving and fractionating into different Aerospace niches. At the same time, as the continual demand for lower brazing costs, system throughput enhancements and furnace capabilities to process complicated part geometries increases, so does the need for stricter guidelines and procedure adherence. While AMS 2750E and Nadcap certification normally form a synergistic bond, they must first be separated in order to understand the differences between the two. This understanding will help simply certification.

Brazing has many advantages when compared to other metal-joining processes. Ideal situations for brazing include: UĂ&#x160;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x160;*>Ă&#x20AC;Ă&#x152;Ă&#x192;Ă&#x160; vĂ&#x160;Ă&#x203A;iĂ&#x20AC;Ă&#x17E;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x152; Ă&#x160; Ă&#x20AC;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x152; V Ă&#x160; cross-sections that need to be joined UĂ&#x160;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x160; Ă&#x192;Ă&#x192; >Ă&#x20AC;Ă&#x160; iĂ&#x152;> Ă&#x192;]Ă&#x160;Ă&#x192;Ă&#x2022;V Ă&#x160;>Ă&#x192;Ă&#x160;V ÂŤÂŤiĂ&#x20AC;Ă&#x160; and stainless steel, that need to be joined UĂ&#x160;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x160;

ÂŤ>VĂ&#x152;Ă&#x160;V ÂŤ i Ă&#x152;Ă&#x192;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x160; containing many junctions to be sealed (e.g. heat exchangers) or deep joints with restricted access UĂ&#x160;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x160; Ă&#x192;Ă&#x192;i L iĂ&#x192;Ă&#x160;Ă&#x153; Ă&#x152; Ă&#x160;>Ă&#x160; >Ă&#x20AC;}iĂ&#x160; Ă&#x2022; LiĂ&#x20AC;Ă&#x160; of joints

For more information about these processes, visit www.IpsenUSA.com/Brazing to view the full technical papers.

MRO Edition Washington

Safety & Regulatory News

of ramping up SDR reporting would be “incalculable,” and the safety benefit would be minimal. “It would merely inundate the agency’s database.”

Word has it that the FAA is working on The petition calls on FAA to issue a a fix to what a group of trade associadirect final rule emphasizing that only tions say was a major change to the reserious defects require SDRs. The “dicently issued revamp of repair station rect final rule” approach, which the asrules that, if followed verbatim, would sociations say is an option because it is cause service difculty report (SDR) “in the public interest” to act quickly, volumes to swell unnecessarily. would not require public comment beThe problem stems from the FAA’s fore being put into place. removal of the word “serious” from a The FAA in early October opened section of the regulation that requires the petition up for public comment. repair stations to report failures, malAmong those weighing in was Aviafunctions or defects via SDRs. The retion Technical Services (ATS), which vamped rules, which go into force Nov. illustrated the potential ramifications 10, are much less sweeping than what of the new requirement. the safety agency proposed in its 2012 “During scheduled draft rule. Among the prochecks on aircraft, we posed changes dropped in identify many discrepanthe final rule: a ratings syscies that are not serious, tem revamp. i.e. chipped paint, debris But one change that in seat tracks, torn seat made it in is a seven-letter covers, etc. With the rule alteration of the language change, we will now be in Part 145.221, clarifying obligated to report these that a repair station “must to the FAA,” ATS noted. report to the FAA within “For us, this will result in 96 hr. after it discovers the additional burden of any failure, malfunction, filling out literally thouor defect of an article.” The sands of reports a year previous rule included the which were not required word “serious” between previously.” “any” and “failure.”

It is not clear whether Most troubling to industhe FAA is preparing to try is that the change was take action by the Nov. 10 not included in the draft The removal of one word from its latest repair station effective date of the new version released for pub- rules threatens to add significant burden to repair-station regulations. Also unclear lic comment in 2012 that reporting requirements, industry says. are ramifications of the generated 250 comments. new rule’s language if a fix is not put Those comments helped convince the repair stations to report all failures, into place until after the new rules are FAA to scale back the final rule. malfunctions, and defects,” the safety in. Because enforcement of the repair The agency in the final rule’s preamagency wrote in 2003, the petition station regulations is done at the Flight ble maintains that the change corrects notes. “Therefore, FAA is reinsertStandards District Ofce (FSDO) level, what amounts to a clerical mistake ing the word ‘serious’ before the word it is conceivable that diferent interpremade in 2000, when “serious” was in‘failure,’” the agency explained at that tations could be put into place, meanadvertently added to the rule’s language time. ing some repair stations could be as part of another rules modification.

The associations argue that the rarequired to report based on the new “The removal of the term ‘serious’ tionale for specifying that only serious rule’s requirements, while others will . . . does not change a standard, nor flaws require SDRs is just as valid tomaintain the status quo. will there be any efect on regulated day as it was a decade ago.

“This is why we scrutinize the rules,” entities other than to prevent future “The burden of reporting ‘any failsays ARSA Executive Director Sarah misunderstandings that would have ure, malfunction or defect’ is as costly MacLeod. “One misplaced or misused been resolved when interested pertoday as when the original removal of word can cause a whole lot of trouble sons contacted the FAA,” the agency the word was contemplated,” the asfor repair stations, their customers explained. “Accordingly, due to the sociations aver. “Articles come to reand—in the end—the flying public. nature and circumstances of the erpair stations because of those stated [T]he agency has the opportunity to ror explained above, the FAA finds conditions; without the word ‘serious’ quickly make things right.” c that further notice and comment are all items received for work would have unnecessary to efect the correction.” to be reported under the rule.”

The associations—led by the AeroThe associations note that the costs —Sean Broderick

Serious Business

nautical Repair Station Association (ARSA) and including Airlines For America, Aerospace Industries Association, Cargo Airline Association, National Air Carrier Association, Aircraft Electronics Association, National Air Transport Association, and National Business Aviation Association—see things diferently.

The term “serious,” they pointed out in a Sept. 23 petition to the agency, was reintroduced into Part 145 via a 2003 rule change, and was based on specific industry feedback supporting the move.

The associations even cite the FAA’s own reasoning behind the 2003 reintroduction of “serious” into the rule. “[I]t was not FAA’s intent to require

AAR

MRO38

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

New Bearing l a Repair Approv – CFM56 #2R – CF34-10 200 – APS 2000/3 – PT6 #6B

, 2014 ber 4 -6 ore Novem p a g , Sin SinE x 221

B o o th

219 -

Refurbishment – Save Cost without Compromising System Reliability FAG Aerospace provides re-manufacturing services that can help you to reliably lower your total maintenance costs.

We do much more than just inspect and clean. Your bearings are restored back to their original “as new” condition. All components are manufactured to the original new design by our OEM approved production. Re-used and re-manufactured components are 100 % NDT inspected.

FAG Aerospace is an approved repair station by FAA, EASA, CAAC and TCCA.

923 005

FAG Aerospace GmbH & Co. KG Bearing Refurbishment aerospace.repair@schaeffler.com www.schaeffler.de/aerospace/repair

MRO Edition Europe

Signing Off Establishing aviation industry rules and then enforcing them are often cited as the most common tasks that civil aviation authorities perform. But for authorities like the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), a robust home market of manufacturers and service providers means certifications are in high demand.

An interesting trend is emerging as the aviation industry recovers from the 2008-09 economic downturn, however.

For reasons that are unclear, certification activity—at least in Europe—is not following suit.

The agency received slightly more than 5,000 certificate applications in 2013—a small decline from the year before, according to figures released in its 2013 annual review. Of these, 3,741— again a slight decline from the prior year—were issued.

Included among the certificates were approvals for big-ticket items like the Rolls-Royce Trent XWB and the Airbus A400M, which earned a restricted type certificate in 2012. But most of the approvals were for far more mundane items—albeit with significant importance in the MRO world. Last year’s sign-ofs included 1,360 for type certificate new derivatives, major changes or major repairs. Another 857 were issued for minor changes or minor repair. By comparison, only 15 type certificates or restricted type certificates were issued.

In general, new type design applications are on the decline, while requests for major changes and derivatives are on the rise.

The big-picture numbers suggest that what was viewed as a temporary blip in applications has become the new reality.

In 2008, the agency sorted through 7,283 new applications—a 14% jump from 2007. By 2009, new certificate applications were down to 5,582, a figure that fell about 15% short of projections, the agency noted in its 2009 annual review. “This is probably a short-term trend,” the agency reasoned then. It issued 4,472 certificates in 2009, or about 16% more than in 2013.

By 2011, applications were down to about 5,000, while certificates issued totaled 3,823. Despite a note that new projects from emerging markets such

MRO40

Safety & Regulatory News as China and India were “expected” in 2012, the figures have remained at roughly the same levels.

EASA’s workload is relevant for several reasons, with prioritizing resources being the most obvious one. Another

The A320-family runway overrun production system, which American added to its Airbus narrowbodies, was certified by EASA in 2013. is revenue generation. EASA’s Europebased certificate holders fund about 70% of EASA’s annual budget, while another few percentage points come

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

from foreign entities with European operations, such as maintenance providers with repair stations in Europe.

“In 2013, the agency paid particular attention to resource optimization in an efort to perform its planned activities within budgetary constraints,” E A S A e xplains in its latest annual report.

In all but the most extreme cases—such as when an AIRBUS a i rc ra f t i s grounded—certification workload takes a backseat to immediate safety issues, such as issuing airworthiness directives. EASA pushed out 350 directives in 2013, including 193 for transport-category aircraft. c

—Sean Broderick

AviationWeek.com/mro

MRO Edition

Human Factor

Working Tired

Acknowledging how sleep afects work quality

S

ome years ago, scientists at Harvard Medical School and other top research facilities examined the cumulative costs of sleep deprevation. What they found was startling: When sleep was limited to 6 hr. or less per night over 14 days, it produced cognitive performance deficits equivalent to up to two nights of total sleep loss. Even more alarming, due to the gradual and cumulative nature of the sleep restriction, the subjects studied were largely unaware of their declining performance. In tests, they thought they were doing just fine.

The demographics of study participants likely are similar to those in any MRO organization. Those studied— healthy adults aged 21-38—were chosen because they fit the demographic found in occupations associated with chronic sleep restriction, including shift work. In that age range, it is also common to find other factors leading to sleep deprivation, including raising young children. These factors can quickly add up to a lifestyle that results in chronic sleep restriction without the worker being aware of how it is afecting their performance.

“People think about fatigue as being physically tired,” says Kevin Gregory, vice president/senior scientist at Alertness Solutions. “But most of it occurs in the higher functions: making decisions, reacting quickly, checking checklists and communicating well with other members of the team.”

Fatigue strikes at the heart of

some of the most important aspects of a technician’s job. This is why it has been pinpointed as one of the “dirty dozen” root causes of errors in aviation maintenance.

CAUSES AND SOLUTIONS Early shifts that require technicians to rise at 4 or 5 a.m. work against the body’s natural circadian rhythms and can produce fatigue. Hours of wakefulness are an issue as well; once we reach 17-18 hr. of being awake, performance degrades. Unplanned variation in the work schedule—such as working longer hours than planned for an urgent job—make it tougher to get the required rest. And a complex workload can bring about fatigue more quickly than low-intensity tasks.

Echoing the sleep study above, Gregory adds, “Fatigue doesn’t get us in one fell swoop, like pulling an all-

By Heather Baldwin Heather Baldwin covers MRO, training and human factors.

She can be reached at: mro@aviationweek.com

nighter. It’s losing an hour to 90 min. a night. It accumulates and comes on gradually” As a result, “there is a misperception of our ability to adapt to it.” Even when we feel tired, we are usually reluctant to admit it. “We tend to think, ‘I’m a dedicated professional; I’m going to get the job done.’ There’s also a perception that it is weak to say you are tired and need to step aside,” says Gregory.

Technicians and managers must better understand what fatigue is, how it afects us and what its symptoms are. Self-assessments can help diagnose fatigue (see sidebar). Short breaks from a task, walking around for exercise, moving into a well-lit area and cafeine can help combat it.

Gregory urges organizations to adopt a Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS), to include policies that allow workers to ask for help without being penalized and a system for reporting and analyzing fatigue issues. For instance, if a technician reported working four nights in a row and the fourth night was too much— and there were multiple reports like this over time—it might make sense to reorganize the schedule or pair the worker with a buddy on the fourth night or lighten the workload.

Admittedly, this is difcult and will likely require a massive cultural shift.

But it is crucial the maintenance industry move in this direction.

“There are reasons we are fatigued,” Gregory concludes. “Everyone has a limit, and at some point people need to recognize that.” c

FATIGUE SELF-ASSESSMENT

T

o determine whether you may be working tired, ask yourself the following questions: Before starting work: Did I get less than 6 hr. of sleep last night?

Have I been building a sleep deficit over time?

Did my shift require me to wake up extremely early in the morning?

Am I working a series of shifts that require me to get up at progressively earlier hours?

MRO42

Have I been asked to work longer hours than normal?

During the shift: Am I slower than usual in performing a task?

Am I having a tough time finding the right words when communicating with others?

Did I forget someone telling me to do something?

Am I generally feeling short-tempered?

If the answer to any of these questions is “yes,” you may be fatigued and therefore more prone to making an error on the job. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

#MROLATAM

January 13-14, 2015 Hilton Buenos Aires Buenos Aires, Argentina

ENGAGE STRATEGY OPPORTUNITIES

Hear key insights and successful case studies from MRO thought leaders, including:

exp S

e

ti y u re c a r mer a C rk w h

n

s

s ral

p

e

o

wi M O

g e

n

M tw

Jonathan Berger, VP, ICF International Yohan Closs, Sales Director, Latin America, Services Solutions, Airbus Tom Cooper, EVP & Principal, TeamSAI Steve Douglas, Manager, Aircraft Maintenance Division, FAA Leonardo Mendoza, Regional Manager, Airlines & Fleets, StandardAero

xi

r

he

Claudio Rodriguez, Purchasing & Logistics Manager, LAN Argentina Ernesto Ruiz, CEO, Aeroman Luiz Gustavo Silva, MRO Executive Director, LATAM Airlines Group Ralf Schulze, Senior Sales Executive Lessors & Banks, Lufthansa Technik AG Ahmad Zamany, VP Technical Operations, Copa Airlines

Learn more and register now! www.aviationweek.com/mrolatam R

O

E

BY

MRO Edition

MRO LINKS

Aerospace Leasing Services Regina Kenney Chicago 1. Inventory and Consignment Company: Unique Airmotive Services Product: Unique Airmotive Services offers lease and exchange programs to minimize downtime. Maintaining a complete inventory of APUs and accessories, UAS provides delivery off the shelf in order to save customers money and eliminate lead times. Customers can send APUs for disassembly, cleaning and inspection, and UAS will provide release certificates for all components meeting inspection criteria. www.uniqueairmotive.com

on-site for replacement needs. A component inventory specialist will prepare rotable exchange programs aimed at lowering life-cycle costs with reduced inventory investment. Airgroup Dynamics also offers a no-fee exchange program for most units. Along with the exchange program, Airgroup Dynamics has a component leasing program to support customers’ aircraft. www.adiaero.com

1

Link #020

4. Aircraft Sales and Leasing

Link #362

2. Engine Leasing and Sales Company: AJ Walter Aviation Product: With a diverse offering of engine types, AJW offers leasing solutions to support aircraft-on-ground, shop-visit coverage or longer lease-term requirements. These leases can be tailored to customer’s specifications. With AJW’s rebuild program, the company is able to provide customers with overhauled engines to maximize time-on-wing, help reduce operational disruption and save airline costs. AJW offers service on these engine types: CFM56-3C1, CF6-80C2B6F, CF6-80C2B1F, RB211535E4B and PW4060-1C. www.ajw-group.com

5

Link #035

3. Inventory of Overhaul Exchange Components Company: Airgroup Dynamics Product: Airgroup Dynamics maintains a large inventory of overhaul exchange components

4

Company: AerSale Product: AerSale offers aftermarket commercial aircraft to passenger and cargo operators globally. AerSale’s fleet includes Boeing and Airbus narrowbody and widebody aircraft in passenger and freighter configurations.

AerSale also provides technical information and customer support throughout transactions. www.aersale.com Link #281

5. ATR Major Component Leasing Company: ACLAS Product: With inventories of ATR main elements and major components, ACLAS offers landing gear shipsets and components for short- and long-term leases.

These components, including propeller blades, hubs and actuators, are held in stock for the ATR 42/72 series of aircraft.

ACLAS offers a 24-hr. aircrafton-ground desk for customers with any component issues. www.aclasglobal.com Link #363

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information

MRO44

aviation week & space technology MRO EDITION november 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

MRO Edition

MRO LINKS SPOTLIGHTS

MRO ASIA FEATURED COMPANIES

MRO Links is an online service that connects buyers and sellers in the MRO industry.

Go online at AviationWeek.com/MROLinks to browse hundreds of companies by service/product category or Links number attached to the featured products below. From the online platform you can see company description and contact information as well as request information from the company. To advertise in MRO Links, contact Beth Eddy at 561-279-4646 or betheddy@aviationexhibits.com.

Join us at Aviation Week’s MRO ASIA CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION on November 4-6 in Singapore, where you can see some of these aftermarket products and services live — and converge with airlines, MROs, suppliers, OEMs, regulators and lessors who defne the aviation maintenance industry.

January 13-14, 2015 Buenos Aires, Argentina

UPCOMING MRO Links Shows:

February 2-3, 2015 Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Visit www.aviationweek.com/events for more information, including complete exhibitor listings and MRO Links participants!

ARROWHEAD PRODUCTS

BOMBARDIER AEROSPACE BOOTH 418

OEM Duct Repairs

Arrowhead Products is an OEM of complex metal and composite ducts used throughout airframe and engine applications.

We offer complete OEM Repair & Overhaul and OEM Licensed Spare parts including Pneumatic, Environmental Control Systems, Thermal Anti-Ice, Engine Bleed Air, Starter Ducts, insulated duct assemblies.

At the cutting edge of aircraft performance is the ability to keep the aircraft where it belongs. In the air. With Bombardier’s expertise, craftsmanship, and competitive pricing, there’s never been a better time to explore the world of repairs or spares to keep your aircraft flying.

www.arrowheadproducts.net Airframes • Components • Engines • Hydraulics/Pneumatics • Parts Manufacturer Link 573

Advanced Materials/Composites • Components • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • Parts Distributor • Parts Manufacturer

KAPCO GLOBAL

KILLICK AEROSPACE BOOTH 518

A Global Stocking Distributor Kapco Global is a large stocking distributor in the global aerospace market. By better understanding our customers’ needs we deliver time-based service advantages – because time matters. With eleven facilities across the USA, Europe and Asia, our promise is to optimize efficiency, productivity and value to make our customer’s life easier.

Cabin Interiors/Inflight Entertainment • Connectors/ Fasteners • Landing Gear/Wheels/ Brakes • Parts Distributor • Supply Chain/Logistics

BOOTH 400/402

Bombardier: Repairs and Replacements

www.bombardier.com

Link 066

BOOTH 600

The Trusted Source for New Generation Aircraft Parts Killick Aerospace is the trusted supplier of New Generation Aircraft Engines, Engine parts and Airframe Components. We hold one of the largest inventories—worldwide— of Airframe Rotables for the B737NG & A320 including, Engine Accessories, Avionics, Landing Gear & Insurance Items.

www.kapco-global.com

Link 753

Airframes • Components • Landing Gear/ Wheels/Brakes • Leasing/Financial Services • Supply Chain/Logistics

www.killickaerospace.com

Link 773

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information AviationWeek.com/mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO45

MRO Edition

MRO LINKS SPOTLIGHTS

MEGGITT

ONTIC ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING

Meggitt Aftermarket Services

BOOTH 445

Meggitt’s aftermarket services aim to provide competitive value to our customers.

Our products include Dunlop Aerospace Braking Systems, Serck Aviation, Whittaker Controls, Vibro Meter and a range of Pacific Scientific product lines. Our global AOG support centre gets you the help you need every hour of every day of the year. US/Canada toll-free: 1-887-666-0712 International: 1-305-477-4711 Avionics/Instruments • Components • Hydraulics/Pneumatics • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • Parts Manufacturer

Ontic Extended Life Solutions

BOOTH 213

Ontic, a BBA Aviation company, provides FAA, EASA Part 21 and 145 support, including new and serviceable spares and repairs for over 4,500 maturing aircraft parts. Its portfolio of products, licensed or acquired from major OEMs, span all major aircraft systems in both the civil and military markets.

www.meggitt.com

Link 751

Avionics/Instruments • Components • Hydraulics/Pneumatics • Parts Manufacturer

3 POINTS AVIATION

AAR CORP

Supply Chain Solutions for Airlines, MROs and OEMs

AAR Puts the Pieces Together For You

3 Points Aviation, specializing in MANUFACTURING, REPAIR & OVERHAUL, has been established in Atlantic Canada. 3 Points Aviation has the most modern and sophisticated multi axis CNC machines to manufacture, and deliver your complex and challenging requirements with ease.

As one of the world’s leading providers of MRO and supply chain services, AAR delivers innovative solutions and value that enable customers to do more with less.

With its subsidiaries, Telair and Nordisk, AAR also designs and manufacturers cargo and baggage handling systems and lightweight containers.

Asset Management • Cabin Interiors • Engineering • www.3pointsaviation.com Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • Parts Manufacturer Link 787

Airframes • Components • Landing Gear/ Wheels/Brakes • Leasing/Financial Services • Supply Chain/Logistics

AEROFIELD SERVICES LLC

AERO-MARINE TECHNOLOGIES

Commercial Aircraft Inspections, Technical Oversight, Aircraft Ferry Service, Engine Borescoping & CAMO Services

When Service and Experience Matter

Aerofield Services LLC offers a global network of highly experienced personnel you can rely on. Aerofield Services offers much more than the standard Records Auditing & Technical oversight services available on the market today. This allows us to be your one stop resource for all your Aviation related needs. www.aerofieldservices.com Consulting Services • Engines * Manuals/ Repair Documentation/Records • Parts Distributor Link 315

www.ontic.com

Link 812

www.aarcorp.com/mro

Link 006

Aero-Marine Technologies, Inc. provides aircraft spares and component repair services to operators throughout the aviation industry. As a globally recognized MRO and distributor of PMA parts we provide customers with reliable aftermarket and supply chain solutions.

Asset Management • Components • Hydraulics/Pneumatics • Parts Distributor • Third Party Maintenance

www.aeromarinetech.com

Link 1007

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information MRO46

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

ADVERTISING SECTION AEROTURBINE

AGSE WESTMONT

Supply Chain Solutions for Airlines, MROs and OEMs

Engine Transport Stand, Handling and Support Equipment & Aircraft Maintenance Docks

AeroTurbine is an industry leader in Supply Chain Solutions.

The cornerstones of our business include: Engine Material, Airframe Material, Engine Leasing, Engine Trading, Airframe Maintenance Services, and AdviseAer™. We support all Boeing and Airbus platforms and the associated engines as well as many regional aircraft.

AGSE is the WORLD LEADER in the design and manufacture of Whole Engine, Split-Ship and Rollover Stand Systems. Broad Range of OEM Licensed Engine Transportation & Handling Systems. Worldwide Presence, AGSE & Westmont are the Global Leaders in the Design and Manufacturing of State-of-the Art Engine Handling Systems.

Our GSE products are renowned for their Ingenuity, Durability and Ease of Maintenance.

www.aeroturbine.com Airframes • Asset Management • Avionics/ Instruments • Engines • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes Link 022

www.agsecorp.com Airport Equipment & Services • Engineering • Ground Support Equipment • Hangars & Equipment • Tools Link 570

AIMTEK, INC

AIRLINE SUPPORT GROUP

Ball Tack Welding for Brazing Set-up Operations

Ground Support Equipment / Boeing & Airbus Tooling

Resistance microwelding can be a powerful process improvement tool in braze set-up operations.

Techniques such as ball tack welding, poke tacking, and honeycomb tack welding can significantly reduce time and improve repeatability.

Visit www.aimtek.com for a detailed product offering of hand tools.

Airline Support Group manufactures, sells, leases and repairs engine stands, specializing in Trent 800, Trent 700, RB211535, CFM56-3-5&7, CF6-80C2, CF6-50C2, CF34-3, V2500-A and Pratt & Whitney engine stands, including JT9D, PW2000, and PW4000. ASG is a supplier of Boeing and Airbus tooling.

Advanced Materials/Composites • Engines • Heat Coating/Brazing • Metals • Tools

www.aimtek.com

Link 511

Airport Equipment & Services • www.airlinesupportgroup.net Asset Management • Ground Support Equipment • Leasing/Financial Services • Tools Link 403

AMGLO KEMLITE LABORATORIES

AMI METALS

Your Lighting Solutions Partner!

Aerospace Aluminum and Service Provider

Amglo Kemlite Laboratories, Inc. is a global manufacturer of specialty lamps and related lamp components in Aerospace, Airfield, Medical, Vehicular, Obstruction, Locomotive, Laser lamp, and Tower Lighting industries.

AMI Metals is an Aerospace service center committed to providing superior customer support for your raw material needs. We have over three decades of experience in the industry and with our nine global facilities, stock availability, and the AOG response time, we are what you need in a supplier. www.amglo.com

Engineering • Lighting • Parts Manufacturer

Link 821

www.amimetals.com

Airframes • Metals • Supply Chain/Logistics

Link 038

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information AviationWeek.com/mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO47

MRO Edition

MRO LINKS SPOTLIGHTS

BASF

CENTRAL FLYING SERVICE

BASF Aerospace Materials

Central Flying Service ...

Passion for Perfection

Aerospace materials from BASF include a broad portfolio of products and technologies that can provide unique solutions across a wide range of applications — cabin interiors, structural materials, seating components, fuel and lubricant solutions, coatings & specialty pigments, as well as flame retardants & fire protection.

Advanced Materials/Composites • Chemicals • Components • Connectors/Fasteners • Fuel/Lubricants

Central’s welding department offers high value with competitive pricing. Our quality and service is unmatched and we are an industry leader in the weld repair of aircraft components.

Some repairs are heat blankets, bleed tubes, de-icing and pneumatic ducts, flap tracks, exhaust pipes and APU ducts. www.aerospace.basf.com

Link 316

Avionics/Instruments • Cabin Interiors • Components Metals • Paintings/Coatings

CHAPPELL SUPPLY & EQUIPMENT

CHEMETALL GmbH

Biological Waste Water Treatment Systems

Key Technologies for the Global Aerospace Industry

The latest in Bio Wastewater Systems.

Turns organic contaminants (oil, grease, etc) into carbon dioxide & water. Available for either RECYCLE or DISCHARGE operations & offers lower maintenance than any other system on the market today, extremely low operating cost & simple equipment operation. HANDLES TOUGH ORGANIC APPLICATIONS: Engine Overhaul Shops, Tire & Wheel Shop, General Maintenance Facilities

With its Ardrox® and Naftoseal® brands, Chemetall offers a complete specialty chemicals portfolio to the aerospace industry: sealants, NDT products, corrosion inhibiting compounds, cleaners, pretreatment technologies and paint strippers for airframe, aircraft operation and aeroengine applications.

Chemicals • Environmental Services/Green • Parts Distributor

www.chappellsupply.com

Link 074

Chemicals • Cleaning • Paintings/Coatings • Test Equipment

CHURCH & DWIGHT CO INC / ARMAKLEEN COMPANY

CLAYTON ASSOCIATES INC

ARMEX® Blast Media The MRO Abrasive

Shrouded Tools Reduce Heavy Metal Dust Exposure

Eliminate particle ingression with this water soluble baking soda based abrasive from the makers of ARM & HAMMER® products. Use safely on various components, even those with complex surfaces and passageways. Safe for sensitive substrates. No pitting, peening or crack closure.

Excellent for NDT prep.

Clear Revolution Shrouds patented design captures dust at the source to reduce worker exposure and FOD. These tools are ideal for aluminum, composites, and heavy metal coatings. They are available for 1”, 2”, and 3” right angle sanders.

Chemicals • Cleaning • Military Maintenance • Paintings/Coatings • Tools

www.central.aero

Link 1008

www.chemetall.com

Link 076

Visit www.DustlessMadeSimple.com for more information.

www.armex.com

Link 040

Advanced Materials/Composites • www.DustlessMadeSimple.com Ground Support Equipment • Military Maintenance • Safety/Emergency Equipment • Tools Link 288

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information MRO48

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

ADVERTISING SECTION CLEMCO INDUSTRIES CORP

EASTMAN AVIATION SOLUTIONS

Robotic Blast Cabinet Enhances Workflow

Aviation Fluid Products Eastman Aviation Solutions brings together Eastman turbo oils, Skydrol™ aviation hydraulic fluids, and SkyKleen™ aviation solvents to provide industry-leading products, technical resources, dedicated support, and improved service for all aviation customers.

Robotic nozzle manipulation delivers repeatable blasting in an appropriately sized enclosure. Pick-and-place capability eases loading/unloading.

Automated vision system detects even the most minor part defect.

Numerous options meet the needs of your demanding manufacturing and maintenance operations.

www.clemcoindustries.com

Cleaning • Military Maintenance

Link 081

Chemicals • Cleaning • Engines • Fuel/Lubricants • Hydraulics/ Pneumatics

www.eastmanaviationsolutions.com

EATON AEROSPACE GROUP

FIRST WAVE AEROSPACE

Eaton’s Aerospace Repair Centers

Best In Service. Right On Price.

Always On Call.

There’s value going to the OEM for repairs because we designed, tested, certified and manufactured the product. Contact Eaton for hydraulic, fuel, actuation and ducting repair solutions.

For the latest list of repair centers visit our website listed below.

Link 1009

First Wave Aerospace is a 21 year-old commercial aircraft parts distributor with 24/7 AOG service answered by a live, experienced parts specialist. If we don’t have a part in our 7-million part inventory, we find it.

Assets Management • Components • www.eaton.com/aerospace_repairs Engines • Fuel/Lubricants • Parts Manufacturer Link 094

Assets Management • Connectors/Fasteners • Hardware • Parts Distributor • Supply Chain/Logistics

HARCO

IMPEX INTERNATIONAL

A320 Landing Gear Harness Repair

Your Single Source for Fasteners and Fittings

Servicing both OEM & Aftermarket with repair, overhaul & replacement. Capabilities include repair or replacement hardware for the entire aircraft, from engine and airframe to APU, landing gear, ECS and all subsystems. Specializing in Harness Assemblies & Temperature Sensors.

www.firstwave.aero

Link 829

Since 1985, Impex provides an extensive product line of standard and special engineered mechanical components (Fasteners and Fittings) to aerospace and defense customers. ISO 9001 / AS 9120 Certified, One Stop Shop for Multiple Items, Exceptional Customer Service.

Major Credit Cards Accepted.

Components • Engines • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • www.harcolabs.com Parts Manufacturer • Third Party Maintenance Link 121

Connectors/Fasteners • Hardware • Parts Distributor • Supply Chain/Logistics

www.impexint.com

Link 757

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information AviationWeek.com/mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO49

MRO Edition

MRO LINKS SPOTLIGHTS

ITR

ITS INFINITY TRADING

World Leader in MRO for Engines JT8D-200 & JT8D STD

Global Supplier of Aftermarket Airframe Parts

Repair and Overhaul Services for JT8D-STD/200 Engines.

• Overhaul Repair for JT8D accessories and Thrust Reverse • 95% Internal Repair Capabilities and Internal repairs for CFM56 components • Electroless Nickel, Machining and Grinding Shop, Full Overhaul Stators • Test Cell up to 100,000 Lbs.

ITS is a Global supplier of commercial aircraft spares.

We support Operators, MRO’s, and Suppliers with parts from our worldwide distribution facilities.

In addition, our services include Exchange/Lease programs, Asset & Repair Management, and Worldwide 24/7/365 AOG support.

Engineering • Engines • Heat Coating/Brazing • Parts Manufacturer • Test Equipment

www.itp.es www.itrmexico.com.mx

Link 414

www.itsparts.com

Airframes

Link 512

J CHADWICK CO

KELLSTROM/MEREX GROUP

8400K Optical Micrometer Kit

Legacy Platform Component Solutions

J Chadwick Co provides portable depth measurement systems for inspecting surface damage.

When specific tolerances apply, exact measurements are essential. Make “repair or replace?” maintenance decisions with confidence; avoid the use of substandard parts and unnecessary scrapping of serviceable parts.

High Tech Avionics: Avionic System, Electro-Mechanical & Mechanical Components www.htaa.net ALCO: APU’s, Hydraulic, Fuel, Electro-Mechanical & Electrical Systems Components www.alco.aero The Kellstrom/Merex Group MRO Division Supports Commercial & Military Legacy Platforms www.jchadwickco.com

Test Equipment • Tools

Link 720

Avionics/Instruments • Hydraulics/Pneumatics Parts Distributor • Parts Manufacturer

www.merexinc.com www.kellstromdefense.com

Link 1010

LAUNCH TECHNICAL WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS

M1 COMPOSITES TECHNOLOGY

Staffing/Recruitment/ Personnel Services

Aerospace Composite & Sheet Metal Repair Services

LAUNCH delivers highly trained aviation technicians and engineers quickly and efficiently. We provide you with creative workforce solutions to meet your unique requirements.

LAUNCH is the most innovative, technologically advanced and customer-driven labor partner for your technical workforce needs.

We offer quality service, rapid turnaround at competitive costs. Transport Canada, ISO9001 & AS9100 certified. Composite & Sheet Metal Structural Repair, Engineering, Mfg, Thermography, NDT, Paint & AOG Services for Control Surfaces, Inlet Cowls, Thrust Reversers, Radomes, Landing Gear Doors, Cargo Nets, Parachutes & Interiors. www.launchtws.com

Engineering • Recruitment/Personnel

Link 550

Advanced Materials/Composites • Components • www.m1composites.com Engineering • Paintings/Coatings • Parts Manufacturer Link 927

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information MRO50

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

ADVERTISING SECTION MACHIDA

MIAMI NDT INC

Make Your Visual Inspection Easier

Engine Repairs and Services

Our product line includes a 6mm Videoscope with WORKING CHANNEL FOD KIT, POWER BLENDING SCOPE, engine manufacture APPROVED INSPECTION KITS in both video & fiber, and our RIGID SCOPE line. We also build custom scopes. Our digital processing units are HD Quality.

Contact us today for more information.

On/Off-Wing Engine Preservation, Unlimited NDT services, GE Top case repairs, Worldwide AOG, On-wing Maximum Power Assurance, Borescope Inspection, Airworthiness Directive & Service Bulletin Compliance, JT8D Engine Repairs, GE & PW Engine Disassembly, Engine management, Dual FAA/EASA Release Forms.

www.machidascope.com

Test Equipment

Link 535

www.miamindt.com

Engines • Third Party Maintenance

Link 152

NATIONAL AIR CARGO

NORCO MANUFACTURING CORPORATION

Freight Forwarder & Airline

World Class Door Systems Designed To Your Specs

National is a global freight forwarder and airline offering expedited and unscheduled services. As an ISO 9001 and C-TPAT certified worldwide airfreight forwarder and CRAF airline we specialize in movement of oversized and time-critical cargo. Our global reach is supported by our offices in Europe, the Middle East and Asia.

Superior seals, insulation and maximum flexibility are just a few of the many reasons Norco door systems are ideal for MRO facilities.

We offer decades of experience in design, engineering and installation and use the latest BIM technologies to ensure a smooth and efficient construction process.

www.gonational.com

Consulting Services

Link 931

www.norcomfg.com

Hangars & Equipment

NORTH BAY AVIATION

NYCOTE LABORATORIES

Committed to Quality Assurance with Worldwide Service

Coating/Maintenance Our unique clear formula shields metals and other compounds from wear, corrosion, friction and conductivity.

Its fluid application eliminates pinholes and gives surfaces a void-free impervious barrier that is unattainable by other products.

North Bay Aviation provides quality component repair services to the Commercial and Military Aviation Industry worldwide.

We offer component repair services for instruments, autopilot and air data computers, gyroscopic units, lighting, electrical actuators, power monitoring and control devices.

Avionics/Instruments • Components • Lighting • Test Equipment

Link 1011

www.northbayaviation.com

Link 925

www.nycote.com

Paintings/Coatings

Link 360

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information AviationWeek.com/mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO51

MRO Edition

MRO LINKS SPOTLIGHTS

PACIFIC AEROSPACE RESOURCES & TECHNOLOGIES

PENTAGON 2000 SOFTWARE INC

Pacific Aerospace Resources & Technologies

PENTAGON 2000SQL MRO/ERP SYSTEM

Aircraft maint. services; SB & AD compliance modifications; aging aircraft modification; return to service maint.; interior modifications; engine removal & installation; landing gear removal & install service provider; FAA repair station #3POR498B; EASA 145.5600

PENTAGON 2000SQL provides a fully-integrated system that supports all of the business software requirements of an MRO enterprise. The system runs in the Microsoft® SQL Server environment and fosters compliance with international regulatory requirements and quality standards.

www.partmro.com

Airframes • Components • Engines • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • Third Party Maintenance

Link 168

Avionics/Instruments • Connectors/Fasteners • Engines • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • Military Maintenance

www.pentagon2000.com

Link 176

POLYKEN & PATCO

PRECISION AERO TECHNOLOGY

Polyken & Patco - Tapes Engineered for Performance

MRO & Supply Chain Services Worldwide

Polyken and Patco brand tapes include a broad selection of high performance, OEM specified tapes for: carpet installation, cargo pit seaming, moisture barrier, surface protection, mounting and bonding, masking, electrical harness wrapping, waterproofing, and more!

Proudly made in the USA!

Precision Aero Technology (PAT), a PAG company, is a world class leader in the repair and overhaul of Commercial and Military avionics, instruments and accessories. Today PAT’s world-wide MRO and supply chain services support both Commercial and GA Fixed and Rotary-Wing aircraft across the globe.

www.berryplastics.com

Parts Manufacturer

Link 1012

Avionics/Instruments • Components • www.precisionaerotechnology.com Engines • Landing Gear/Wheels/ Brakes • Military Maintenance Link 361

PROFESSIONAL AVIATION ASSOCIATES

REDVIKING

Take the Professional Approach To Custom Built Hoses

Turn-Key Solutions to MRO & Manufacturing Problems

No matter the hose. No matter the aircraft - fixed wing or helicopter.

We are your best resource for quality hoses - fast.

RedViking is a U.S. designed and built engineering company that specializes in solving MRO and manufacturing problems. We have designed and built helicopter test stands for the U.S. Army, weapons controls for the U.S. Navy, complete munitions production/inspection and more. We are ready to serve.

• Certified 2,000 Sq. Ft Parker Stratoflex FAA/TSO facility • Custom Built Assemblies/Kits • Recently Added New Fabrication Equipment and Tripled Capacity • Worldwide Distribution Airframes • Avionics/Instruments • Engines • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • Parts Distributor

www.proaviation.com

Link 851

Consulting Services • Engineering • Hydraulics/ Pneumatics • Military Maintenance • Test Equipment

www.redviking.com

Link 1013

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information MRO52

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mro

ADVERTISING SECTION SKYTRONICS

SOLID CONCEPTS INC

#1 Source for HSTA and THSA Repairs

Prototype & Production Aerospace Components

FAA Repair Station with 50+ years experience providing top-quality repair & overhaul services for all Boeing Commercial HSTAs, Flap Ball Screws, Transmissions, & other Chapter 27 flight controls.

Production expertise is critical to our aerospace customers.

Solid Concepts is AS9100 certified with an expert aerospace manufacturing engineering team.

Direct Digital Manufacturing (DDM) 3D printing provides rigid, lightweight custom aerospace parts impossible to achieve via other methods.

Skytronics also offers repair and overhaul services for Airbus THSAs (PN4715) on the A320 family of aircraft.

Airframes • Components • Military Maintenance • Parts Distributor • Parts Manufacturer

www.skytronicsinc.com

Link 425

www.solidconcepts.com

Components • Parts Manufacturer

Link 1014

STANDS ON DEMAND INC

UPS

Engine Deal Done?

Is Delivery Standing in the Way?

Fuel Your Supply Chain for Global Growth

Contact Stands on Demand! The industry leader in short & long-term engine stand leasing.

Over 14 engine types available in four locations in the USA and Europe. We can provide engine stand solutions for your needs. For further details visit: www.standsondemand.com or call 305-558-8973

UPS delivers operational excellence, dependable compliance procedures and proven reliability at every link in the supply chain. Our global transportation and contract logistics expertise provide enhanced process controls, regulatory knowledge and total visibility, so you can perform at your best.

Engines • Ground Support Equipment • Leasing/Financial Services • Tools

www.standsondemand.com

Link 1015

www.ups.com/aerospace

Supply Chain/Logistics

Link 1016

VAS AERO SERVICES

www.vas.aero VAS is an aftermarket distributor for The Boeing Company, Embraer, GE Aviation, Hamilton Sundstrand, Honeywell Aerospace, and others. In addition, VAS is a preferred supplier to leading airlines worldwide. Our global network manages over $3 Bn of aerospace products.

Avionics/Instruments • Connectors/Fasteners • Engines • Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes • Lighting

Lead Generation for

GREATER ROI Connect with innovative products, services, technologies and suppliers Aviationweek.com/MROLinks www.vas.aero

Link 235

To advertise in the MRO Links Spotlight section, contact: Beth Eddy • +1 (561) 862-0005 • betheddy@aviationexhibits.com

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information AviationWeek.com/mro

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

MRO53

MRO Edition Advanced Materials/ Composites Aimtek Inc . . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 BASF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Bombardier Aerospace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO45 Clayton Associates. . . . MRO48 M1 Composites Technology . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Airframes AAR Corp . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 AeroTurbine . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 AMI Metals . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Arrowhead Products . . MRO45 ITS Infinity Trading. . . . . MRO50 Killick Aerospace . . . . . MRO45 Pacific Aerospace Resources & Technologies. . . . . . . MRO52 Professional Aviation Associates . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Skytronics . . . . . . . . . . . MRO53 Airport Equipment & Services AGSE Westmont . . . . . MRO47 Airline Support Group . . MRO47 Assets Management 3 Points Aviation . . . . . . MRO46 Aero-Marine Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 AeroTurbine . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Airline Support Group . . MRO47 Eaton Aerospace Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 First Wave Aerospace . . MRO49 Avionics/Instruments AeroTurbine . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Central Flying Service . . MRO48 Kellstrom/Merex Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Meggitt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 North Bay Aviation . . . . MRO51 Ontic Engineering & Manufacturing . . . . . . . MRO46 Pentagon 2000 Software Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Precision Aero Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Professional Aviation Associates . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 VAS Aero Services . . . . MRO53 Cabin Interiors/InFlight Entertainment 3 Points Aviation . . . . . . MRO46 Central Flying Service . . MRO48 Kapco Global . . . . . . . . MRO45 Chemicals BASF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Chappell Supply & Equipment . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Chemetall GmbH . . . . . MRO48 Church & Dwight Co / ArmaKleen . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Eastman Aviation Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Cleaning Chemetall GmbH . . . . . MRO48 Church & Dwight Co / ArmaKleen . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Clemco Industries. . . . . MRO49 Eastman Aviation Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49

MRO LINKS

CATEGORY INDEX

Components AAR Corp . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Aero-Marine Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Arrowhead Products. . . MRO45 BASF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Bombardier Aerospace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO45 Central Flying Service . . MRO48 Eaton Aerospace Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Harco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Killick Aerospace . . . . . MRO45 M1 Composites Technology . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Meggitt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 North Bay Aviation . . . . MRO51 Ontic Engineering & Manufacturing . . . . . . . MRO46 Pacific Aerospace Resources & Technologies. . . . . . . MRO52 Precision Aero Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Skytronics . . . . . . . . . . . MRO53 Solid Concepts Inc. . . . MRO53

Environmental Services/ Manuals/Repair Green Documentation/Records Chappell Supply & Aerofield Services. . . . . MRO46 Equipment . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Metals Fuel/Lubricants Aimtek Inc . . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 BASF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 AMI Metals . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Eastman Aviation Central Flying Service . . MRO48 Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Eaton Aerospace Military Maintenance Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Church & Dwight Co / ArmaKleen . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Ground Support Equipment Clayton Associates. . . . MRO48 AGSE Westmont . . . . . MRO47 Clemco Industries. . . . . MRO49 Airline Support Group . . MRO47 Pentagon 2000 Software Inc Clayton Associates. . . . MRO48 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Stands On Demand . . . MRO53 Precision Aero Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Hangars & Equipment RedViking. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 AGSE Westmont . . . . . MRO47 Skytronics . . . . . . . . . . . MRO53 Norco Manufacturing . . MRO51 Paintings/Coatings Hardware Central Flying Service . . MRO48 First Wave Aerospace . . MRO49 Chemetall GmbH . . . . . MRO48 Impex International . . . . MRO49 Church & Dwight Co / Connectors/Fasteners ArmaKleen . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 M1 Composites BASF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Heat Coating/Brazing First Wave Aerospace . . MRO49 Aimtek Inc . . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Technology . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Impex International . . . . MRO49 ITR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Nycote Laboratories . . . MRO51 Kapco Global . . . . . . . . MRO45 Pentagon 2000 Software Inc Hydraulics/Pneumatics Parts Distributor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Aero-Marine Technologies . . . . . Aerofield Services. . . . . MRO46 VAS Aero Services . . . . MRO53 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Aero-Marine Technologies . . . . .

Arrowhead Products. . . MRO45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Consulting Services Eastman Aviation Bombardier Aerospace . . . . . . .

Aerofield Services. . . . . MRO46 Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO45 National Air Cargo . . . . MRO51 Kapco Global . . . . . . . . MRO45 Chappell Supply & RedViking. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Kellstrom/Merex Group . . . . . . . Equipment . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 First Wave Aerospace . . MRO49 Engineering Meggitt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Kapco Global . . . . . . . . MRO45 Kellstrom/Merex Group . . . . . . .

3 Points Aviation . . . . . . MRO46 Ontic Engineering & AGSE Westmont . . . . . MRO47 Manufacturing . . . . . . . MRO46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 RedViking. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Impex International . . . . MRO49 Amglo Kemlite Professional Aviation Laboratories . . . . . . . . . MRO47 ITR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Landing Gear/Wheels/Brakes Associates . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Launch Technical Workforce 3 Points Aviation . . . . . . MRO46 Skytronics . . . . . . . . . . . MRO53 Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 AAR Corp . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 M1 Composites AeroTurbine . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Parts Manufacturer Technology . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Bombardier Aerospace . . . . . . . 3 Points Aviation . . . . . . MRO46 RedViking. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO45 Amglo Kemlite Harco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Laboratories . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Engines Killick Aerospace . . . . . MRO45 Arrowhead Products. . . MRO45 Arrowhead Products. . . MRO45 Meggitt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Bombardier Aerospace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO45 Aerofield Services. . . . . MRO46 Pacific Aerospace Resources AeroTurbine . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 & Technologies. . . . . . . MRO52 Eaton Aerospace Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Aimtek Inc . . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Pentagon 2000 Software Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Harco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Eastman Aviation ITR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Precision Aero Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Kellstrom/Merex Group . . . . . . .

Eaton Aerospace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Professional Aviation Harco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Associates . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 M1 Composites ITR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 VAS Aero Services . . . . MRO53 Technology . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 Meggitt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Miami NDT Inc. . . . . . . . MRO51 Ontic Engineering & Leasing/Financial Services Pacific Aerospace Resources & Technologies. . . . . . . MRO52 AAR Corp . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Manufacturing . . . . . . . MRO46 Pentagon 2000 Software Inc Airline Support Group . . MRO47 Polyken & Patco . . . . . . MRO52 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Killick Aerospace . . . . . MRO45 Skytronics . . . . . . . . . . . MRO53 Precision Aero Technology Stands On Demand . . . MRO53 Solid Concepts Inc. . . . MRO53 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Recruitment/Personnel Professional Aviation Lighting Launch Technical Workforce Associates . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Amglo Kemlite Stands On Demand . . . MRO53 Laboratories . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 VAS Aero Services . . . . MRO53 North Bay Aviation . . . . MRO51 VAS Aero Services . . . . MRO53 Safety/Emergency Equipment Clayton Associates. . . . MRO48

Supply Chain/Logistics AAR Corp . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 AMI Metals . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 First Wave Aerospace . . MRO49 Impex International . . . . MRO49 Kapco Global . . . . . . . . MRO45 Killick Aerospace . . . . . MRO45 North Bay Aviation . . . . MRO51 UPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO53 Test Equipment Chemetall GmbH . . . . . MRO48 ITR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO50 J Chadwick Co . . . . . . . MRO50 Machida . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO51 RedViking. . . . . . . . . . . . MRO52 Third Party Maintenance Aero-Marine Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO46 Harco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO49 Miami NDT Inc. . . . . . . . MRO51 Pacific Aerospace Resources & Technologies. . . . . . . MRO52 Tools AGSE Westmont . . . . . MRO47 Aimtek Inc . . . . . . . . . . . MRO47 Airline Support Group . . MRO47 Church & Dwight Co / ArmaKleen . . . . . . . . . . MRO48 Clayton Associates. . . . MRO48 J Chadwick Co . . . . . . . MRO50 Stands On Demand . . . MRO53

Enter Link # at www.AviationWeek.com/MROLinks for more information MRO54

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY MRO EDITION

AviationWeek.com/mro

ITâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S GOOD TO BE POWER-FULL. From wireless IFE and crew mobile devices powered by Samsung, to dynamic LED lighting and an in-seat power system that provides a lighter, lower cost power solution at every seat, IntelliCabin enables a fully connected cabin that will enhance the passenger experience while reducing crew workload. â&#x201E;˘

Learn more at: www.baesystems.com/intellicabin

MTU – Maintaining your power

pair Fu l l r e i t y f o r il c a p a b 0 G r ow t h 9 the GE

At MTU Maintenance, we believe in streamlined, cost-effective results. We are the world’s largest independent engine service provider, combining the benefits of state-of-the-art technologies, decades of expertise, customized maintenance solutions and process excellence. MTU’s extensive MRO portfolio now also includes the GE90 Growth. Dedicated to support you. www.mtu.de

AIR TRANSPORT

American Airlines posted a 59% increase in thirdquarter net income.

Lower fuel prices boost U.S. airline profits, but carriers remain wary about growing capacity Brian Sumers Los Angeles, Madhu Unnikrishnan San Francisco and Sean Broderick Washington

U

.S. airlines may be flying high, but they are not about to get carried away.

The nine largest publicly traded U.S. carriers made money in the quarter ended Sept. 30, with several reporting record or near-record earnings thanks to full cabins and lower fuel prices. But the industry is still largely very cautious about adding capacity to capitalize on the improved environment, even as lower fuel prices make once marginal routes more profitable. “We can’t count on $80 [per barrel] crude prices going forward,” warns Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly.

Delta Air Lines CEO Richard Anderson says he is more concerned about cutting underperforming routes and adding lucrative ones than growing capacity, which his airline plans to increase just 1-3% in 2015, he tells analysts. Delta is realigning its international network, pivoting away from Asia-Pacific routes—which will see a “high-single-digit decline” in capacity next year—while planning on modest growth of 3% or less in North Atlantic capacity. The carrier also has cut capacity to Moscow, Tel Aviv and West Africa by 20% as it moves to align with demand.

Delta is acquiring 88 Boeing 717s that Southwest inherited when it bought AirTran Airways and has begun using them to replace inefcient 50-seat regional jets. Delta executives also are moving faster than expected to stop flying Boeing 747s, saying they are increasingly unprofitable. The last 747 is expected to leave the fleet by 2017. New Airbus A330s will start arriving next year, and Delta is eyeing an even bigger widebody order. “We’re still working diligently on evaluating both the Airbus and Boeing option,” Anderson says. “It’s going to be a very interesting process because the most important thing for us is not operating costs, it’s ownership costs.”

Southwest, which saw its third-quarter net income shoot up 62% from a year earlier, has received a lot of attention for AviationWeek.com/awst

With Aaron Karp in Washington.

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 39

ERIK SIMONSEN

Taking Off

its move into international routes. But such flights account for just 1% of the airline’s capacity, and Kelly does not see that share expanding much in the near future. “Our 2015 international growth plans are modest,” he says, adding that the new routes are “a drag on our results right now.”

Southwest is projecting about a 5% increase in capacity in the first quarter of next year as it adds flights at Dallas Love Field and Washington Ronald Reagan National Airport, and as the 717s sold to Delta are replaced by larger Boeing 737s.

United Airlines, which has bounced back from a disappointing first-quarter loss and earned $1.1 billion in net income for the first three quarters of 2014, plans to limit capacity increases in 2015 to 1.5-2.5%. The carrier is purchasing two used 737-700s and now plans to fly its Boeing 767s into 2020, several years longer than originally planned. United is seeking to improve efciency by flying larger aircraft and in some cases trimming frequencies.

American Airlines also is “upgauging” its fleet, replacing 50-seat regional jets with larger Bombardier CRJ900s and Embraer E175s and retiring a mix of Boeing 737s, 757s, 767s and MD-88s while adding 22 new aircraft. The new mix should add 2-3% to its capacity next year. “The airplanes that are leaving the fleet are fuel inefficient,” CEO Doug Parker says. “The new airplanes make a dramatic efect on our product.”

American shrugged off soft demand in Latin America, where it plans to reduce capacity, and reported a 59% increase in third-quarter net income compared with the same period a year earlier.

Among smaller network carriers, Hawaiian Airlines, Alaska Airlines and JetBlue Airways are all making money. But JetBlue says its earnings were hampered by overcapacity in Latin America and the Caribbean. “The challenges we’ve had out of that part of the world have not been in load factor,” JetBlue President Robin Hayes says. “There has been a lot of capacity and that has put close-in pressure on average fares.”

Alaska executives reported some softness in Seattle, where Delta has increased competition by adding flights, but they say the operation remains profitable.

Both U.S. publicly traded ultra-low-cost carriers, Spirit Airlines and Allegiant Air, also reported solid earnings results, with Spirit’s pre-tax margins coming in at 19%. Spirit also stands out in the industry for its aggressive expansion.

It plans to take delivery of 15 Airbus narrowbody jets in 2015, expanding its fleet of 58 aircraft by more than 25%. c

AIR TRANSPORT

The 14-day strike in September by Air France pilots, including those who fly the Airbus A380, cost the group €416 million in lost revenue.

Stalled Transformation As Air France and Lufthansa strive to cut costs, pilot strikes inflict major pain and demand outlook worsens JOEPRIESAVIATION.NET

Jens Flottau Frankfurt and Cathy Buyck Brussels

T

he conflicts with their pilots have cost Air France-KLM and Lufthansa well in excess of €500 million ($635 million). Now Europe’s two biggest legacy airlines are focusing on how to make up for the loss.

“There will be no growth in our hub operations until we

Roo Rebound Return to underlying profit bolsters a battered Qantas Adrian Schofield Auckland

Q

antas Airways has had precious little to celebrate recently, but that could change with early signs of a remarkable revival. Just a few months after reporting record annual losses, Qantas claims to have already climbed back to profitability—while rival Virgin Australia remains firmly in the red.

For Qantas, an underlying pre-tax profit for the three months through Sept. 30 is the most positive indicator yet that its massive restructuring program is working. In contrast, Virgin Australia is adding to its challenges as it takes over the struggling Tiger Airways Australia.

Qantas is one of many Asia-Pacific airlines that typically reports results half-yearly rather than quarterly. However, CEO Alan Joyce revealed at the company’s Oct. 24 annual general meeting that the airline was operating in the black for the first three months of its fiscal year—without divulging specific numbers. Joyce also confirmed that Qantas is on track to achieve his earlier target of an underlying profit for the fiscal first half.

Joyce’s prediction of a quick return to profitability seemed like wishful thinking when the airline’s numbers for the 2013-14 fiscal year were announced in late August. Qantas slumped to an A$2.8 billion ($2.5 billion) loss for that period, although the underlying loss was $A646 40 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

get to a competitive cost structure,” Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr said last week. The airline has kept the number of its aircraft stable for four years—the first time in 60 years that the fleet has not grown over such an extended period.

Spohr’s statement makes clear that future initiatives will go far beyond the proposed low-cost carrier (LCC) afliates that are to be added to the group portfolio by the end of 2015, but that unit costs at the core airline are the real problem.

Negotiations with pilots have resumed, but the most contentious issues—early-retirement benefits and new LCC units—have been separated from the talks. While that may result in a strike pause, the negotiations over pay will almost certainly lead to higher staf costs: Pilots are demanding 10% raises; Lufthansa has ofered 5%. Strikes have cost the airline €170 million this year, and more industrial action will lead the airline to issue a profit warning for 2014.

While the Lufthansa Group reported an overall €849 million operating profit for the first nine months, the airline division—Lufthansa and Swiss, Austrian and Brussels airlines —contributed only €473 million and Lufthansa-branded flying €260 million, showing the group’s dependence on highmargin subsidiary businesses such as the Lufthansa Technik maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) division. Its profit

million excluding a massive write-down of fleet values.

While Joyce has caught criticism from many quarters, he has remained committed to his plan for reshaping the airline.

The three-year transformation plan was ofcially launched eight months ago, although major changes that occurred earlier can be viewed as part of the same campaign.

Qantas Chairman Leigh Cliford says the airline is already stronger and leaner, with a “more sustainable model.” He notes that Qantas is conducting a transformation equal in scale to—if not larger than—those that other international airlines have been able to achieve only under bankruptcy protection or with government assistance. Neither benefit has applied to the Australian carrier.

The Qantas restructuring plan is aimed at cutting A$2 billion in costs over the three-year period. A large part of the savings comes from eliminating 5,000 jobs, with half of these cuts already completed. By the end of June 2015, 80% of the planned redundancies will have been made. The carrier also expects to have reduced its debt by $A1 billion by then.

Early retirement of older aircraft is helping boost fleet efciency, and Qantas reports that aircraft utilization rates are up by 12% in its international fleet this year.

The airline’s forecast turnaround can be attributed partly to the transformation plan, and partly to external factors.

Falling fuel prices are more than ofsetting the reduced purchasing power of a weaker Australian dollar. The government’s repeal of a controversial carbon tax should also help.

Load factors for the three months through September increased in all parts of the group’s operations—including the Jetstar low-cost carrier (LCC) subsidiary. Group yields were down, with sluggish domestic demand outweighing an improvement in international yield.

One of the most important trends is the easing of capacity AviationWeek.com/awst

(€335 million) was substantially higher than the passenger airline’s.

Pilot issues and high legacy costs are not the only worries for Spohr. Lufthansa decreased its operating profit target for 2015 and no longer expects to reach €2 billion, although the result will be “well above” the €1 billion envisioned for 2014. The profit warning comes as Lufthansa sees overall demand slowing as the economic crisis mode in some parts of the world could afect demand for air travel.

According to CFO Simone Menne, the capital expenditure for 2015 could come under scrutiny again. Lufthansa also has reduced its expected capacity growth by a percentage point to 3%. That growth is anticipated as the airline adds seats to existing aircraft and introduces larger ones. But that direction could lead to accelerated retirement of Boeing 747-400s and remaining 737 Classics as well as Bombardier CRJ900s operated by Eurowings.

Neither Air France-KLM nor Lufthansa is considering deferment of aircraft orders.

Air France-KLM, too, says it has the “firm intention” to limit the financial consequences of the two-week strike by its pilots in September through a series of measures, such as reducing capital expenditures and increasing unit cost cuts, but it stressed that no drastic measures or massive layofs are planned.

“We can’t just pretend that nothing has happened,” says Pierre-Francois Riolacci the group vice president for finance.

“The strike has added €400 million to €500 million of debt to our balance sheet. There will be strong austerity measures on our investment, we will take further action to reduce unit cost, and we will be looking at our asset portfolio.”

To reduce capital expenditure, the company may revise its fleet plans. Management has not yet firmed plans for longhaul capacity growth for next year and increases in the summer 2015 schedule.

Riolacci admits that ofsetting the financial impact of the Air France pilots’ strike to protest the establishment of a low-cost subsidiary, Transavia Europe, will take longer than six months. But he says the focus needs to be on proceeding with the restructuring of the company and implementing the Perform2020 overhaul plan.

The Franco-Dutch group’s third-quarter results were strongly afected by the strike, which had an estimated negative impact of €330 million on the operating result. Total revenues shrank by an estimated €416 million but were partly ofset by €86 million of cost savings.

The third-quarter results were the worst since 2009. Net profit fell to €100 million from €148 millon in the year-ago period, but for the €187 million derived from the sale of Amadeus shares, the group would have reported a net loss. And when excluding that one-of gain, net loss for the first nine months has increased to €701 million from €651 million in the same period of 2013. Air France-KLM reported a record €1.5 billion net loss last year. c

growth in Australia’s international and domestic markets, which had been a major headache for Qantas. Both Qantas and Virgin Australia have backed away from a destructive capacity war in domestic markets, and the lower Australian dollar is making it less appealing for overseas carriers to add flights to Australia. Mainline capacity for Qantas was down slightly in the quarter, and while Jetstar capacity rose, the hike was less than the increase in trafc.

Virgin Australia gave a more complete outline of its quarterly results, which reveal an airline still struggling to break even. The carrier reported an underlying loss of A$45 million for the three months through September—its fiscal first quarter—and a net loss of A$59.1 million.

Like its rival Qantas, Virgin also lost money in the 2013-14 fiscal year, posting a net deficit of A$355.6 million.

CFO Sankar Narayan notes that the September quarter is seasonally the weakest for Virgin Australia, although it managed to improve its result by 18% versus the same quarter a year earlier. Its overall capacity was essentially flat.

Not included in the underlying result was Virgin Australia’s share of losses from its majority-owned low-cost carrier Tigerair Australia, which amounted to A$11.6 million in the September quarter. On the same day that it revealed its latest losses, Virgin announced it is buying the remaining 40% of Tigerair Australia from Singapore-based Tiger Airways Holdings.

While taking on a greater share of a loss-making

entity may seem counterintuitive, it is a strategic move which is part of Virgin Australia CEO John Borghetti’s overall plan to compete with the Qantas group in as many sectors as possible.

As Virgin Australia has transformed into a full-service carrier, it has left the bottom end of the market to Qantas LCC Jetstar. Gaining control of Tigerair Australia will allow Virgin to battle Jetstar head-on. At the moment Tigerair only flies domestic routes, but Borghetti says it may expand to short-haul international markets in Southeast Asia and New Zealand.

Tigerair Australia has 13 Airbus A320s in its fleet. When Virgin first bought into Tigerair, it said the LCC’s fleet could grow to as many as 35, although it has more recently stated that 20-23 aircraft would be optimal. Borghetti is now signaling that the LCC’s fleet growth plans may be slowed further due to soft domestic demand. c

Qantas is making its fleet more efcient thanks to accelerated retirements and increased aircraft utilization rates.

QANTAS

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 41

NEXT-GENERATION AVIONICS

Blue Sky Notes Customers aid in charting Honeywell’s course for future flight deck John Croft Phoenix

T

here may be no such thing as a dumb question, but a dumb idea merits a red Post-It note in Bob Witwer’s Flight Deck of the Future lab.

Red, along with yellow notes that mark good ideas, and blue ones that proclaim “Aha!” moments, are visual touchstones on an illustrated storyboard of a typical flight laid out on white boards here at Honeywell Aerospace’s Deer Valley Advanced Technology campus. Pilots, mechanics, researchers, managers and others have been pasting the notes to the wall of the one-year-old lab when they sample the seedlings of new modes, modalities and devices designed to help pilots interact with the flight deck during the various phases of a flight. Honeywell researchers and engineers merely have to turn to the wall of fame or shame to know how they are doing.

Early customer evaluations are part of an evolving design process that focuses on the “user experience” for humanmachine interfaces, a company-wide efort to tease out the spoken or unarticulated needs of the end users of its products early in the development cycle. Previously, engineers would keep projects under wraps until higher-fidelity working prototypes were complete, a practice Witwer, vice president of Advanced Technology, says that made it more difcult for users to give honest feedback. “If you engage the user in the design process, you find out what they need and you’ve got another creative mind in on the process,” says Witwer.

For pilots, the cooperative design process should lead to enhanced situational awareness with intuitive man-machine interfaces that reduce workload. While the most mature of the new ideas, which span technology readiness levels 0-4, could be two years from the marketplace, Honeywell is confident its

Video Take a look inside Honeywell’s FD-X lab—tap here in the digital edition or go to AviationWeek.com/FD-X

new process will bring greater success in terms of customer demand. As of late September, more than 50 “users,” including Aviation Week, had toured the lab and provided feedback on low-fidelity, rapidly constructed prototypes. Included were tablet-based flight-management system aids, unstabilized approach avoidance tools, and multimodal avionics controls using a mixture of voice recognition, gesture and eye-tracking.

Among other projects, engineers in the Flight Deck of the Future (FD-X) lab recently completed the first phase of a multiyear project to explore how pilots interact with cockpit devices. The initial phase covered modes, modalities and devices, whereas the second phase, underway now, is exploring information visualization. In the third phase, Honeywell will study decision aids, alerting systems and “how to architect the overall experience in the cockpit,” says Rakesh Jha, director of crew interface and avionics platform systems. Although most of the 450 engineers involved work in Arizona, projects are underway in labs in the Czech Republic, India and China. At the Brno lab, Czech engineers are focused on a new energy management system to help pilots make corrections at higher altitudes before an approach becomes unstable.

One of the more market-ready technologies at the Deer Valley lab is an aid that simplifies the legacy “tree” architecture of a modern flight management system (FMS). “We did a lot of observational ‘voice of the customer’ studies [and] one of the biggest complaints was that pilots can’t find certain FMS pages,” says engineering fellow Sue McCullough. “There are 30-40 pages in an FMS, and pilots tend to [stick to] the 4-5 pages they know. We wanted to improve that.” Workload during a flight can increase dramatically if, for example, air trafc control changes an arrival procedure, because pilots generally have to navigate from the FMS “progress” page to the “approach” page, located four or more pages beneath, to make changes. Among other input methods, the team decided to try voice control. Customers, including Gulfstream pilots, were impressed with an early prototype in the FD-X. “It wasn’t a panacea, but it would do functions you don’t do frequently or find data you might not have at your fingertip,” she says.

The next step was to integrate a portable tablet with Honeywell’s Primus Epic integrated cockpits, in particular with the company’s next-generation FMS, a unit that is on the Gulfstream G650 and Boeing 747-8. Evolutions of the FMS are already underway, including for the Gulfstream G500 and

Honeywell technology guru, Bob Witwer (far right), explains the workings of the FD-X lab.

HONEYWELL PHOTOS

42 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

the product development organization next G600 announced Oct. 14. The new business year. jets, set for first deliveries in 2018 and 2019, Prototypes of other input devices in the respectively, will have a Honeywell-inspired FD-X come straight from the gaming world.

Gulfstream Symmetry flight deck with 10 Engineer Steve Grothe demonstrated a mix touchscreen controllers in the overhead of voice-, eye- and gesture-control devices on panel and on the center pedestal for sysa simulated flight deck that could help pilots tem controls, flight management, commuwith certain tasks, although this is at the very nications, checklists and other functions. early stage. Rather than using a traditional A touchscreen controller will replace the cursor, Grothe demonstrated how he could traditional multifunction cockpit display use a commercially available Leap Motion unit (MCDU) in the center pedestal, a degesture controller to pan a 2-D navigation vice that provides input to the FMS via a map to the left or right, using his fist, or keypad on the bottom or bezel keys along zoom in or out using a clockwise or counterthe sides of the display. Also available on Honeywell is exploring ways to clockwise twirl of his index finger. The drop both aircraft either as standard kit or an option will be another feature born in the use various languages (Manda- of a finger caused the display to pan back rin, above) for its avionics. to the current location of the aircraft. Leap Advanced Technology labs—3-D airport Motion uses infrared cameras to sense hand moving maps (see page 46). motion. Another use for a gesture controller could be to silence For the tablet prototype, ground rules allowed no changes to certain noise sources in the cockpit. Grothe discussed how a mechanical interfaces or wiring on the flight deck, constraints “halt” hand gesture, similar to what a pilot would use to signal that led to the creation of the Honeywell innovation prototypsilence to another pilot, could be used to mute nonessential ing environment, or HIPE. McCullough demonstrated it in the radio transmissions, including automatic terminal information G650 cockpit rig. Inside HIPE—a form-fitting replacement service (ATIS) reports for a certain duration. “Rather than havfor the MCDU—is an Arinc 429 converter with a USB input ing to fumble for the audio panel, you can wave your hand into for the tablet, which then becomes a high-resolution MCDU gesture space to mute the ATIS,” says Grothe. display with touchscreen or voice-control input. The connecChallenges to be tackled include the ability to come up tion could also be made with wireless technology. The tablet with a “very small” vocabulary of movements for the gesture has an Arinc 729 protocol decoder that translates touch or device, as well as the optimum number and placement of the voice commands from the tablet into FMS commands. Using devices to catch the required movements. Another question a commercially available headset, McCullough demonstrated is whether a pilot will need to stabilize his or her arm to achow a verbal “change approach” command brings up the apcurately signal the device, particularly in turbulence. proach page on the tablet turned surrogate MCDU. She says Based on FD-X visits, Honeywell finds that voice control can the technology also was tested in the cockpit of an Embraer be beneficial when used in combination with other modalities.

E-Jet—a regional aircraft equipped with a Primus Epic cockFor example, if a pilot’s hands are busy with a task, speech can pit—and that the voice commands worked despite the exterbe a good alternative for some actions, a concept pilots must nal noise environment in the cockpit. Feedback from pilots generally experience to believe. “We asked leading customers, is also leading to other potential uses for connected tablets, ‘Do you think speech in the cockpit is a good idea?’” Jha says. including as an aid for preventing confusion about autoflight The consensus was “No.” “We did some rapid prototyping . . . system modes. McCullough says the display could take on a and let pilots experience it.” One chief pilot “who was against diferent “look and feel” when mode changes occur. the whole thing” became a believer when he tested a prototype.

Another benefit of the high-resolution portable display, Grothe demonstrated one of the mixed-mode prototypes other than pilots being able to place the tablet in the most in FD-X. Using eye-tracking, he was able to highlight one of convenient location, is that the system can allow for a “crossthree screens in a mock flight deck and select that screen (the cultural cockpit,” which MCDU labels in a selected language. boundary of the screen turned green once selected) using voice Honeywell has experimented with Mandarin and Portuguese. control. Grothe then used a swiping motion with his right hand Some of the HIPE technologies are slated to transition into to move the screen’s contents to the other screens with a swipe gesture in the appropriate direction. The same could be done with sub-windows within a display, he says. The transfer did not always go as planned, highlighting some of the limitations of a rapid prototype setup. He also showed that transfers or manipulation on the screen could be accomplished via touchscreen controls, highlighting another modality option.

From a broader standpoint, Honeywell sees all the various technologies coming together to create an automation holism wherein humans team with machines rather than interact with them. “They will complement each other in transparent ways,” says Jha. “Consider the machine to be another pilot, who is nearly human.” The future flight deck is a place where automation lowers workload but also ensures that the crew is never faced with a situation where they are unsure of what’s going on and what they need to do. “That’s situationalawareness nirvana,” says Witwer. c AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 43

NEXT-GENERATION AVIONICS

Textron AirLand came to Genesys predecessor Cobham Commercial Systems for the cockpit/ autopilotfor the Scorpion light attack jet.

Oasis in Texas

acquired by Cobham in 2001 and renamed Chelton Flight Systems. Chelton was the first company to certify a synthetic vision primary flight display for Part 23 aircraft with its FlightLogic line in 2001, and remains the only company with synthetic vision EFIS certifications for all four light- and transportcategory fixed-wing (Part 23 and 25) and rotary-wing (Part 27 and 29) aircraft, says Pratt. Other “firsts” for Chelton include GPS/WAAS (wide area augmentation system) navigation, highway-inthe-sky guidance, conformal runway depiction and trafc depiction on the primary flight display.

Forward-fit placements for the EFIS include the Grob G120TP turboprop trainer and the AgustaWestland AW109 GrandNew twin-turbine helicopter. “We are a first-tier subcontractor at the cockpit-level for EFIS-based systems, but we also supply individual EFIS and autopilots,” says Smith of the company’s approved supplier status for Sikorsky, Embraer, Kaman and others. “We can supply piece parts, or can rip the entire cockpit out of a civil aircraft and install a new integrated flight deck.”

The Scorpion cockpit is designed for three Genesys integrated display units (IDU) in the front seat, for the pilot. For the back seat—meant for a second pilot, mission systems or weapons ofcer—a single Genesys IDU-680 (6 X 8-in.) or IDU-450 (4 X 5-in.) can be installed; either provides all functions. Both seats have flight controls in place.

Genesys keeps its displays simple with minimal part numbers. “The same displays can be installed in a Bell Jet Ranger, Lockheed C-130, Mil Mi-17, or the Scorpion,” says Pratt. “We can meet special mission requirements very rapidly and with a high degree of fidelity at relatively low costs.” Pratt says the core processor in IDU can drive a larger display, but there has been no demand for that from customers. He says the next generation of display hardware will “probably” have certain touchscreen capabilities, but he notes that Genesys has “strong biases” about how to implement touchscreen technology, in part because of the ruggedness requirements of its customer base.

Conservatism and commonality in displays means the company is not apt to move with the latest consumer trends in displays because it customer base is military and paramilitary—groups that need tough equipment. “It’s not driven by the newest coolest stuf you can buy at Circuit City or Best Buy,” says Pratt. “It’s the stuf that will power up at -55C and operate at 100C continuously. We’ll produce a display for 15 years, so we want to make sure we don’t produce a product that goes the way of the 8-track or Beta Max.” Genesys’s installed-EFIS base is split roughly equally be-

Special missions comprise a large part of Genesys Aerosystems’ new portfolio TEXTRON AIRLAND

John Croft Washington

I

n the fall of 2012, Textron AirLand found that neither of the two avionics companies it had hired to independently develop versions of an integrated flight deck for its thensecret Scorpion light attack jet project could deliver on a highly compacted, two-year concept-to-first flight schedule.

That’s when they called on Cobham Commercial Systems in Mineral Wells, Texas.

The challenge was pretty much business as usual for Cobham, a provider of electronic flight information systems (EFIS), autopilots and other avionics. The company already had an impressive track record of government and specialmission flight decks for programs such as the Sikorsky S-61T modernization and the service life-extension program for the Embraer 312 Tucano.

One year after Textron signed a contract with Cobham, the tandem-seat Scorpion achieved first flight in December 2013. Cobham displays were in the front and rear cockpits, the flight management system and terrain awareness warning system, solid state gyros and autopilot.

Earlier this year the team that pulled of the project—Cobham’s EFIS and S-TEC autopilot divisions—split from Cobham in name and ownership (but not location), and became Genesys Aerosystems.

Along with supporting legacy products, Genesys has a new strategy to bolster its market share for integrated cockpits in large Part 25 air transport category aircraft. Behind the buyout were Cobham Commercial Systems General Manager Roger Smith and Controller Tammy Crawford, and EFIS entrepreneurs Gordon Pratt and Rick Price, who completed the deal in April. “We’ve got a reenergized focus with a company of dedicated people,” says Smith of the 140 employees in Mineral Wells. “We’re investing in new activities.”

New activities include increased functionality for the EFIS, a new autopilot for Part 25 fixed-wing aircraft, and expanding the HeliSAS autopilot line for helicopters with more supplemental type certificates. The company’s EFIS units have supplemental type certificates (STCs) in more than 700 diferent aircraft types, and S-TEC has certified autopilots in nearly 1,000 aircraft types and delivered more than 40,000 systems.

Genesys Aerosystems’ EFIS expertise stems from Pratt and Price, whose first company, Sierra Flight Systems, was

44 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

tween fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft, at 49% and 51%, respectively, and “both are growing pretty dramatically,” says Pratt.

The growth that interests the company the most is in the special missions area, where needs are increasing but budgets are shrinking. “Coast guards, border patrols, drug interdiction agencies, domestic air sovereignty forces, training organizations—all are being asked to do more with less,” he says. “Instead of buying a new Sikorsky S-92, they’re instead refurbishing 10 S-61s for the same amount of money.”

For autopilots, demand in the Part 25 transport-category aircraft market is rising based on obsolescence with systems using vacuum tubes and through-hole circuit boards, says Pratt. A new autopilot Genesys is developing for an unnamed customer will apply to 50,000-lb. takeof-weight aircraft, which include Bombardier Dash 8 series, the ATR 42 and ATR 72, as well as commuter turboprops and small jets.

“That’s the sweet part of the market where people are coming to us saying, ‘We really wish you had an autopilot for our application,’” says Pratt. “Some are special mission customers but a lot are short-haul commuter and freight operators.” He says the demand is global, but particularly active in Europe, Southeast Asia and Latin America.

Aiding the EFIS expansion is a software feature that Price developed years ago, but one that the company has now branded. The Oasis, (Open Architecture System Integration Symbology) is a software tool that allows Genesys engineers or the customer, when trained, to modify or create elements on the display. “It’s almost like a very high-level object-oriented program language,” says Pratt. Display changes are made via a text file that compiles into a special software load that is “precertified” to the highest software reliability level (DO-178B Level A) and gets approval at the aircraft level as part of an STC. Pratt provides an example: “Halfway into a flight-test program after a year and half of work, the test pilot or launch customer wants a torque gauge that is 10% larger and an ITT [turbine temperature] gauge that is 10% smaller so he can quickly pick out one versus the other. In a traditional system, that would take a couple days of software mods, a six-month verificationand-validation efort and $100,000 of Level A testing. We can do it in an afternoon; it can be flying the next day and not afect the certification schedule.”

How much the customer can do is limited mostly by imagination or need—buttons and labels generated by a mission computer, a search-and-rescue radar display, weapons/store management, simulated air-to-air tactical intercept for a trainer that does not have tactical radar or live simulated adversaries. “A solid-state circuit-breaker system used to require tremendous amounts of software the first time around,” says Pratt. “Now it can be done in a few weeks by an aircraft manufacturer. We teach them how, and they generate their own Oasis files.”

One area where Genesys is about to make big changes to its legacy EFIS in the 3-D imagery in its synthetic vision, which historically had a blue sky over brown terrain with contours shown by a wire mesh overlaid by flightpath and aircraft performance symbology. The system uses 6 arcsec foreground terrain for the 3-D scene on the PFD; 24 arcsec for background terrain, and 3 arcsec for the 2-D moving map display. While most other synthetic vision providers moved to full-color systems with 3-D realistic terrain years ago, Genesys did not. “There were some certifications requirements in the FAA that we wanted to make sure we met so we could maintain our synthetic cert in all four classes AviationWeek.com/awst

[Part 23, 25, 27, 29],” says Pratt. “Now that the requirements have become more harmonized, you’re going to see dramatic improvements in our displays in terms of the color, the realism and the shading, including bodies of water.” He says the software update, which will be field loadable, will be out before year-end. What will not be added are taxiways and airport structures on the 3-D or 2-D diagrams, elements that Pratt says customers have not requested. “We’re not ruling it out,” he says, “but in the past it has not been a driver for winning programs for us. We’re not Garmin, with hundreds of software engineers at our disposal. We pick and choose what we’ll develop and certify.”

Systems are built in Mineral Wells, where about half of the employees are involved with touch labor, says Smith. Components, rather than completed systems, are stocked. From order to shipment, an autopilot takes 3-6 weeks, depending on priority; an EFIS takes about 12 weeks.

Pratt says while Genesys EFIS prices are generally high, cost is relative. “If you are the commanding general of an air force in Latin America and you have six Black Hawks with old Sperry gyros in an analog cockpit and three are down at any time because you can’t get parts, you come to us,” he says.

Genesys, he says, can deliver hardware in 12 weeks, while the competitors, Honeywell, Rockwell Collins or Thales, would take two years, ultimately resulting in a higher cost.

“The price for one of our displays would shock you, unless you’re that commander of the armed forces and you’re equipping the Black Hawks, in which case you say, ‘What’s the catch?’” c

Genesys Aerosystems’ flight deck for the Grob G120TP military trainer displays the company’s new enhanced synthetic vision during a flight over the Bavarian Alps.

BRIAN HANDLEY

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 45

NEXT-GENERATION AVIONICS

Epic Immersion Temporal integration future-proofs Honeywell flight deck John Croft Phoenix

T

hree words best describe a suite of new software tools Honeywell is building for its Primus Epic integrated flight decks: seamless situational awareness. From turning on the master switch in pre-flight to setting the parking brake post-flight, business aviation or airline pilots using the new applications will gain hyper-awareness of their condition and surroundings with displays and symbology that present the appropriate information at the right time, smoothly transitioning from one phase to the next. The new applications will hit the market in the next 2-3 years.

Honeywell is particularly driven to give pilots an edge in the high-density, low-visibility operations that are critical to the FAA’s plan to boost efciency and capacity with the Next-Generation Air Transportation system (Nextgen). Of primary interest are taxi, takeof, approach and landing operations, for which Honeywell is increasingly using designs

HONEYWELL/GEORGE TENNEY

46 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

that transform computationally intensive tasks into visually simple graphical solutions with displays and symbology that communicate directly with the visual cortex of the brain. The idea is to eliminate mental calculations that can delay action or prompt the wrong response.

Honeywell test pilot Sandy Wyatt illustrated the design goal on an approach into Tucson when I was sitting in the left seat of Honeywell’s Falcon 900EX EASy experimental flight-test aircraft one morning in late September. Wyatt, in the right seat, switched of the SmartVision synthetic vision guidance system (SVGS) on my primary flight display (PFD) and replaced it with the legacy blue-over-brown symbology.

My initial reaction was a mental blank as I considered how to revert to traditional instrument approach techniques.

Wyatt uses a computer analogy to explain that common reaction.

“You have to switch to a diferent part of your brain to figure it out,” he says. “You have to start using the CPU as opposed to the GPU [graphics processing unit].” The GPU is intuitive, which will be beneficial for newer generations of airline pilots with less experience. One potential downside, however, is that the visual display is so compelling that it could hurt basic instrument flying skills, a situation that may or may not be detrimental to safety. Either way, regulators and industry will have to address a new set of issues as flight decks become more visual and connected over time.

Using a ruggedized laptop in the cabin of the Falcon connected to the left-side and center displays in the cockpit via a test interface unit, Honeywell principal scientist John Suddreth connected my displays to the prototype Epic software, including 2-D and 3-D airport moving maps (AMM), cockpit display of trafc information (CDTI), SVGS and a combined synthetic and infrared-based enhanced vision system (CVS).

The applications are in two stages of design maturity: product code for CDTI, 2-D and 3-D AMM; and advanced technology code for SVGS and CVS. The product code has completed flight testing and needs only minor tweaks before it becomes certified under the FAA’s rigorous DO-178B software assurance design standards. The advanced technology code requires continued flight testing before being “turned over” to the product group for formal trials in advance of certification eforts. Honeywell says all four of the applications will be available as options for the entire Primus Epic-based cockpits fleet as soon as 2016.

The benefits of the new applications were apparent even before we started the N889H’s three engines at Honeywell’s at Phoenix Deer Valley Airport hangar. Wyatt powered up the avionics, with three of the four 14.1-in displays (the primary flight display and two center multifunction displays) using non-certified Epic code from Suddreth’s laptop. Wyatt progressively zoomed in on the airport, bringing up a highdefinition 2-D airport map with labeled runways, taxiways and buildings at a 2-nm zoom range and below. Traffic is displayed at all zoom levels using the installed Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast “In” avionics.

En route to Tucson, Wyatt demonstrated how the CDTI application allows the crew to place the cursor on displayed targets to obtain information, highlight aircraft or take part in Nextgen practices including in-trail spacing and merging

Honeywell test pilot Sandy Wyatt uses a 3-D synthetic vision taxi tool on the primary flight display during a recent flight.

AviationWeek.com/awst

and spacing. Distances to nearby buildings and runways are brought to scale by a circular range marker centered on the aircraft. The integration of maps and charts, zoom level and map detail with Honeywell’s integrated navigation system is far superior to the flight decks that are limited to electronic versions of FAA or Jeppesen airport diagrams displayed as separate charts.

Next, Suddreth put my primary flight display (PFD) into taxi mode, causing the forward synthetic view to back up and climb for an exocentric view above and behind a 2-D representation of our aircraft, centered on a compass rose for directional awareness. Honeywell engineers continue to optimize the display to provide just enough data to perform various checklists while not cluttering the screen. The tool—with ramp, taxiway and dynamic runway labeling—was extremely useful in taxiing at Deer Valley and more so at Tucson, where the layout was more complex. Boosting safety are 3-D cues for danger zones, including a “wall” or roadblock that pops up when the aircraft is approaching a runway intersection from a taxiway. Honeywell has also developed a taxi helper (notionally called “taxi wizard”) that will compute the best path to a runway end, including constraints, and image the path on the airport map. A future enhancement will bring the taxi route onto the PFD. Motion in the exocentric synthetic scene was smooth as we

a landing. The CVS fuses infrared or radar data with the synthetic data, bringing the airborne segment progressively lower.

The company is taking part in ongoing industry eforts to develop the performance specifications for onboard landing aids that could be used down to 300 ft. RVR, essentially zero visibility, complemented by taxi aids to get to the ramp.

A challenge for Honeywell is that only systems with a head-up guidance system (which includes a head-up display, or HUD) have been approved for “credit” in lower landing minimums using onboard sensors in lieu of the naked eye.

The company is pursuing landing guidance systems based on head-down displays only, contrasting with competitor Rockwell Collins, whose head-up guidance system division gives it an edge in China, where all commercial aircraft must have HUDs by 2025. Honeywell argues that its head-down display is equivalent or superior to a head-up guidance system, in part because it has a large display area and virtually unlimited colors with which to work. “It’s not too late to get China to consider head-down displays,” Wyatt says.

While recognizing HUDs’ safety contributions—first with flight-path vector, energy cueing and lower landing minimums—Wyatt says Honeywell has anecdotal evidence that many airline pilots with captain-side HUDs are leaving the devices stowed, “even though they have standard operating procedures to use them for takeof and landing.” He notes that this may be because of “contact switch,” the difculty some pilots experience in making the mental switch between a HUD, focused at infinity, and the outside world. “Put the same information on a head-down display with a full color-rich background, and people don’t have that issue,”

The situational awareness diference between legacy (right primary flight display) and future taxi guidance (left primary flight display) is significant.

HONEYWELL/GEORGE TENNEY

lined the Falcon up for takeof on Runway 7R at Deer Valley.

When preparing for takeof, the pilot can switch back to the normal 3-D view on the PFD, or the system will automatically switch when power is applied. On landing, the PFD smoothly transitions from normal view to exocentric at 50-kt. airspeed.

Eventually, 3-D AMMs will be coupled with infrared or radar sensors to become an onboard surface movement guidance and control system for low-visibility ground operations following a landing carried out with SVGS and CVS. SVGS creates a 3-D synthetic day visual-flight-rules reconstruction of the approach and airport environment on the PFD from terrain, obstacle and airport databases, validated by five monitors running in the background. The goal is to reduce the Category 1 instrument approach airborne segment to 150 ft. above the runway from 200 ft., with an associated decrease in the normal Cat. 1 runway visual range (RVR) from 1,800 ft. down to 1,400 ft. At an altitude of 150 ft., the pilots will have to see the runway environment to continue AviationWeek.com/awst

Wyatt says. Honeywell is taking an incremental approach to proving head-down equivalence, starting with SVGS initially and evolving to CVS. Wyatt had me hand-fly SVGS and CVS approaches to Runway 11L at Tucson in the Falcon. The task of getting the heavy jet to the runway was easy and intuitive on the PFD without any reference to the outside world.

SVGS features a graphical precision approach path indicator (PAPI) that fades in on the left side of the virtual runway, emulating an actual PAPI and making for a very natural assessment of glide path. There is also a cyan box drawn around the runway, with the closest edge marking the touchdown zone; put the flight path vector on that line and that is where the aircraft will go. Honeywell uses a trackcentered synthetic vision view versus the heading-centered view a pilot would see over the nose of the aircraft. A “crabby” aircraft symbol near the center of the screen shows the relationship between heading and track, giving the pilot a cue where to look for the runway in the transition to visual when there is a crosswind.

At approximately 5 nm, the 3-D AMM environment around the runways, including taxiways and buildings, starts fading in. I did not notice, but Wyatt assured me my visual cortex did. “It’s part of the situational awareness,” he says. “It’s a seamless switching from air mode to ground mode. We gradually fade it in so that when you get on the ground, it’s there.” c AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 47

NEXT-GENERATION AVIONICS

Universal Upgrades Avionics maker jumps forward with InSight flight deck John Croft Orlando, Florida

using a flush-mount cursor control, two push buttons, a keypad and knob or two. The only touchscreen capability in the near term will be between a pilot’s portable iPad and an onboard router to load flight plans into the flight management system, an option that Universal plans to make available sometime after the initial certification next year.

“We took a very serious look at [touch],” says Reida. “But with the typical customer in the [Part 25] markets we serve, we decided not to go there.

For those aircraft, it can be difcult to access touchscreens. We also have a customer base that flies using gloves, and we didn’t want to shut them out.”

JOHN CROFT/AW&ST PHOTOS

Universal Avionics flight test pilot Joel Glunt uses the 3-D exocentric vision feature of InSight to help with taxiing at Orlando Executive Airport.

U

niversal Avionics is about to certify a new flight deck that tightens the working relationship between pilot and machine with a blend of higher-resolution 3-D synthetic vision, larger displays and new icon-based command-and-control architecture.

Called InSight, the system is the first major integrated cockpit refresh in nearly a decade from the company that first certified synthetic vision for the multifunction display in 2002, for light airplane (Part 23) primary flight displays in 2005 and for air transport (Part 25) cockpits in 2006. The firstgeneration product was rudimentary by today’s standards, however, with lower-resolution graphics, no on-screen graphical flight-planning capabilities, no runways represented on the 3-D forward views and no split-screen options.

With InSight, by contrast, all the modern features and high-resolution databases have been brought up to date and “future-proofed” with the addition of wireless access. Universal expects to certify the fixed-wing version in dual-pilot configuration in its Cessna Citation VII flight-test aircraft in mid-2015. The company will hold the supplementary type certificate (STC) for the broader Citation Model 650 series, making it available to its dealer

network for retrofits, and it is eyeing other Part 25 aircraft.

“We learned a lot from 10 years of flat-panel retrofits and forward-fits in 30 different certifications,” says Dan Reida, vice president of sales for Universal. “We went back to the drawing board to improve on what we had and remain innovative. We’ve succeeded with InSight.” Reida says the company did not pick the dual-pilot Citation VII “because there was a huge market,” but because it met the needs for the initial certification of the InSight system in a Part 25 aircraft.

Aviation Week observed the new cockpit in action on a round-robin flight from Orlando Executive Airport northward to Tallahassee on Oct. 18 in the Citation VII with Universal senior test flight test pilot Joel Glunt and business development manager and pilot Carey Miller. One initial surprise for a newmodel flight deck is that there are no installed touchscreen devices, an option competitors are increasingly using to augment the human-machine connection. At the request of its customer base, Universal took a countercultural approach with InSight, however, in that practically all interactions between pilot and machine are carried out on the pedestal behind the throttle quadrant

48 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

Consistent with the philosophy, there are no bezel buttons or touchscreen capabilities in the Citation’s four 10.4-in displays in portrait format, which are larger than the 8.9-in. displays for Vision-1, the first-generation system. InSight has an Ethernet-based architecture that results in fewer linereplaceable units and more processing carried out on commercially available displays hardened to aircraft standards

by Universal.

The enhancements have allowed the company to cut the price of the new EFI-1040 display to 60% of the cost of the 8.9-in. EFI-890; a three-display system starts at $250,000 for aircraft with a Universal flight management system (FMS) and a typical autopilot, says Reida. Universal continues to build and support the EFI-890 at its Tucson, Arizona, facility.

“We still have programs in the early stages [with the EFI-890],” Reida says.

Along with business aircraft, Vision-1 is installed in special-mission aircraft and some regional airliners, including Air Iceland Bombardier Dash 8s.

Glunt put me in the right seat of the Citation VII cockpit on the ground at Orlando Executive to demonstrate the features of the cockpit. Initial boot-up of the system took more than 5 min. due to the alignment needs of the legacy attitude heading reference system (AHRS), a component Universal kept with the cockpit to keep costs down.

Other original equipment included the air data computers, autopilot, crew alerting system and standby instruAviationWeek.com/awst

ments, regrouped in the center of the flight deck.

The downside of keeping the original lower-fidelity AHRS is that the Citation VII certification will not include one of the most powerful features of typical 3-D synthetic vision, a flight-path vector that shows where the aircraft’s nose will physically intercept terrain, runway or the zero-pitch line.

The option will be available on aircraft with higher-perform an ce i n e rtial systems, though. Universal is using a heading-centered synthetic scene (points where the nose points) rather than a track-centered view. A track-centered view tends to filter out turbulence or yawing motion but develops an ofset between the view from the windscreen and the synthetic view in crosswinds.

Eye appeal comes from the new higher-resolution LED side-lit displays that use a 3-arcsec terrain database to render 3-D synthetic vision in the foreground fading to lower resolution in the background to mimic how the human eye perceives a scene.

While Universal will sell an optional reference-select panel for entering headings, altitudes and speeds for the autoflight systems, Glunt notes that all inputs can be made directly into InSight’s new electronic control display units (ECDU) in the central pedestal.

The ECDUs are mounted below a cursor control device and above alphanumeric keypads, all three of which are used for centralized control of the displays and the FMS. Icon-based menu navigation and graphical flight planning are shown on both the EFIS displays and the ECDUs. Radio control is handled on the ECDU, with InSight offering “suggested” frequencies, depending on location and phase of flight, an option Glunt says has always provided him correct information for frequencies needed at an airport.

Pushing the “Com 1” button on the left bezel of the ECDU brings up a window showing the suggested and preset frequencies in a large type size that is more legible to aging and fatigued eyes.

The low-profile cursor control, a button the size of a U.S. quarter that reAviationWeek.com/awst

cesses the pedestal, is somewhat of an anachronism for a modern cockpit—it is stif and moves the cursor at relatively slow speed—but it is appreciated by pilots. Glunt, who came to Universal 18 months ago, says he did not like the device when first introduced but is now “a fan.” “It takes a little practice to become adept with it, but given the other cursor controls on the market, this one is surprisingly functional,” he says.

The InSight ECDUs on Universal’s Citation VII test aircraft (inset) feature screens with large type for input clarity.

Glunt used the cursor to click on map items and restricted airspace zones in the multifunction display (MFD) to show how information about the point comes up in a window. In that window, approaches for an airport can be added to the flight plan by hitting the “A” button to the left of the cursor. The “B” button to the right of the cursor puts the cursor symbol in pan mode for largescale scrolling around the map.

Reida says the displays are built with an adaptive collar to allow for diferent orientations and screen sizes. “We have our eyes on 12-in. and 15-in. displays,” he says, adding that the company is also considering going back to 8.9-in. displays as an option. Glunt demonstrated

a wireless flight plan uplink to the FMS from an iPad, a follow-on InSight option that will include a small remote router and will be ofered downstream of the certification.

Available initially will be high-resolution airport maps, which include labeled runways, taxiways and buildings for more than 600 airports that are shown in both ego- and exocentric views on the primary flight display (PFD) and multifunction displays. At Orlando Executive, which is currently not covered in the high-resolution database, Glunt put the geo-referenced airport diagram up on one MFD and a 3-D exocentric view on the other to show the relative location of the aircraft to taxiways, a useful tool even though the taxiways were not labeled. Runway numbers are included, though, and a large white number 7 came into view on the PFD as we turned onto the runway.

The synthetic view of the runway was somewhat choppy through the flat turn but not overly distracting.

During the flight, the PFD, which is approximately conformal to the view out the window, was split in 75/25 format to show sub-windows of movingmap charts and traffic in the small windows at the bottom. The system has shading logic that creates a haze layer in the sky that closely matched the October sky over Florida at 20,000 ft. En route, Glunt showed options for bringing weather and other services up on the MFD using both the icons on the displays or alternatively with the buttons on the ECDU. Once heading back to Orlando Executive, he used the cursor control to select the airport on the moving map and load the Runway 7 area navigation (RNAV)-GPS into the flight plan. Nearing the airport, I noted that the Citation VII’s InSight software load did not include an extended runway centerline option. However, the feature will be on the certified system to help pilots locate the airport from farther out. Within a couple miles of the airport, the graphical airport and main taxiways began to appear on the PFD, along with the physical runway through the windscreen.

The virtual runway danced somewhat in yaw as some light turbulence tossed the Citation, matching the view through the windscreen but somewhat amplified. The synthetic view was superb nonetheless and spot-on in alignment with the centerline to touchdown and beyond. c

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 49

NEXT-GENERATION AVIONICS

Touchdown Forward thinking is apparent in Rockwell Collins’s retrofit cockpit John Croft Cedar Rapids, Iowa

T

ouchscreens are slowly becoming standard fare in the modern cockpit design philosophy, but not when it comes to the primary and multifunction displays. Some designers say it is because crews sit too far from the devices, making touch impractical; others say touch as a technology is just too gimmicky to put on such crucial real estate, particularly for larger, more complex Part 25 aircraft. Still others say that since their customers must wear gloves, touch won’t work.

Rockwell Collins did not heed such skepticism, and now has what may be a gamechanging new flight deck to show for it, complete with touchscreen displays across the front of the panel, touch toolbars, icon-based controls and simplified automation interfaces for singlepilot operations. Set for first certification late this year as a retrofit option for the Beechcraft King Air—a family of Part 23 twin turboprops—the inaugural Pro Line Fusion retrofit is intended to be upwardly mobile.

“From a certification standpoint, the technology is directly applicable JOHN CROFT/AW&ST to aircraft certified under Part 25,” says Adam Evanschwartz, director of business and regional aircraft marketing for Rockwell Collins. Pro Line Fusion is the company’s newest integrated flight deck, flying today on the Bombardier Global 5000 and 6000 as well as the Gulfstream G280 and Embraer Legacy 500. More than a dozen other civil and military aircraft will be equipped with Fusion, including the Bombardier CSeries, Mitsubishi MRJ and Avic MA-700 regional airliners.

Touch control on the three 14-in. landscape displays at the front of the King Air is an important element of the flight deck, but not the prize attraction given the pressure required by the safe and conservative resistive touch technology being used, a selection that also works with gloves. Pilots, me included, invariably try to pinch and zoom the screens, a learned behavior from the ubiquitous capacitive touchscreens we all use on consumer devices, but one that yields no results here.

From the pilot’s perspective however, the power of the King Air upgrade is more in the blending of touch with the flight-deck’s advanced synthetic vision and the overhaul of the human-machine interface for single-pilot operations, a design that is intuitive and very engaging.

I sampled the new cockpit with Rockwell Collins senior flight test captain, George Palmer, in the company’s King Air 50 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

250 demonstrator on a flight from the company’s home base in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, to Rockford, Illinois, on Oct. 16. The flight included light instrument weather conditions during one approach, but with very little turbulence, a factor that is often of concern for touchscreen considerations. I am not a King Air pilot and rarely fly aircraft equipped with a flight management system (FMS), but I was able to easily program the simplified version of the Fusion FMS and quickly became comfortable with operating the flight deck during two 30-min. flights, including taxi, takeof, climbs and descents as well as instrument approaches.

Launched in 2011, the King Air retrofit originally targeted aircraft that were factory equipped with Rockwell Collins legacy Pro Line 21 avionics, although the company in September announced that it would also ofer the upgrade for the older Pro Line 2-based flight decks, bringing to more than 2,000 the potential pool of targeted King Airs. Certification of the Pro Line 2 upgrade is slated for mid-2015.

Evanschwartz says costs for the retrofit will be “in the neighborhood of $250,000” when existing equipment, including radios and autopilots, can remain in the aircraft.

The expected down time is less than two weeks. First to be delivered will be Pro Line 21 King Airs sold by Hawker Beechcraft, now Textron, to customers in 2011 when the program was launched.

Textron service centers

Aviation Week Senior Editor John Croft tried out Rockwell Collins’s Fusion touchscreen flight deck recently on a Beechcraft King Air 250. will modify Pro Line 21 aircraft; Landmark Aviation will upgrade Pro Line 2 aircraft. The launch customer for a Pro Line 2-equipped King Air is an undisclosed party. Evanschwartz says the Fusion retrofit will eventually “migrate to other platforms.”

The design goals—keeping the pilot’s eyes forward and head up—were evident when Palmer, sitting in the right seat, brought up power to the flight deck of N117EU at the Cedar Rapids airport to prepare the aircraft for the flight.

Noticeably missing is the traditional control display unit AviationWeek.com/awst

fuel onboard, cargo and passenger weight, hit “execute” and (CDU) for FMS inputs in the center console, replaced in this the plan was set in the computer. We dialed in the barometric case by a QWERTY keyboard complemented by quick-access pressure using the legacy knobs at the base of the center pedkeys, including direct-to, maps and checklists, as well as a estal, located with the traditional tilt and range controls for pan-and-zoom joystick. The quick-access keys are designed weather radar. I would later set minimums for an instrument to bring to the screen the information pilots most often need approach into Rockford by pressing the altitude tape on my with the push of one button, rather than “having to go headsPFD, and stepping down one level into a submenu to enter down into the CDU to find a buried menu,” says Palmer. Keys the altitude. V-speeds or navigation sources can be entered can bring up the map, FMS and checklists. For the radio and in the same way by pushing the appropriate areas on the transponder tuning and control, pilots can type a frequency left side of the PFD. “You don’t have to have any knowledge (no decimal point) or code into the keyboard, hit the “Qik of displays,” says Palmer. “The menu gives you the options.”

Tune” key, and the system will find the best fit for the enTaxiing to the runway at Cedar Rapids, I put the PFD into try—whether frequency or code—and present the choices full-screen mode, noting the clarity of Fusion’s 3-arcsec terrain on the forward displays for the pilot to execute by touching database, which fades to a lower resolution at longer distances. the screen or pushing an “execute” button. The keyboard Fusion’s airport database for 3-D synthetic vision on the PFD is bordered on each side by identical controllers to provide includes runways only; own-ship position on taxiways is shown control knobs for tabbing through the controllable elements on the airport diagram, which can be a bit crowded with other on the screen and modifying data values. information. Evanschwartz says the next update of Fusion, in “If you need something in a hurry and you’re a pilot who 2015, will include airlikes to touch controls, port 2-D maps with you have the buttons,” more zoom capability says Palmer, adding to declutter complex that the buttons and airports. This was cursor control would not a problem at Ceprobably be the indar Rapids, and as we put devices of choice taxied onto the runin heavy turbulence. way the identifier on Originally cursor conthe PFD showed “13,” trol was thought to be matching multiple favored over touchheading data sources. screen, says Palmer, O n ce a i rb o r n e, of pilot reactions to we used the origithe flight deck. “It nal equipment panel turned out to be the on the glare shield opposite. Every time for managing pitch, we bring someone in heading and speed and they’re not sure input for autoflight they’re going to use modes. Touching a the touch features, Pilots change or configure PFD items in any of the highthey find themselves using it. It lighted areas, or “hot spots,” by touching the display or waypoint or airport on the moving map display brings is one reason we went back and via cursor control devices in the center pedestal. up menus that can be used for put in beveled edges around information about the point, or to modify the flight plan, for the displays.” example, to add a holding pattern. One slight distraction for The beveled edges, which extend out approximately 0.5 me was trying to scroll on the map using the double-stack in., surround the exterior of the primary and multifunction controller rather than the joystick—a choice that caused the displays (PFD/MFD), giving the pilot an anchor point to staknob to rotate and change the scale of the map. By touchbilize a hand for touchscreen control. I found the top ledge ing on the Rockford airport on the screen, I could bring up particularly convenient for anchoring my hand to touch items the airport diagram, or see and select any of the instrument on the screen. To make changes, you push a finger into the approaches. Touching the “feather” markings leading to runscreen near a “hot spot” area and the applicable menus pop ways on a map will provide an option for loading an approach. up on-screen. Menus can be removed by clicking the “X” in Palmer selected the Runway 7 instrument landing system the corner, or waiting 8 sec. except for items related to the approach at Rockford and leveled at 3,000 ft. above a cloud FMS, where menus must be cleared by hand. Most areas deck en route to the initial approach fix. Fusion-specific on the screen contain items that can be changed, except for features—a virtual dome over the arrival airport and an exthe attitude display. The primary flight display can be used tended runway centerline with distance markers—made easy for a full synthetic-vision-system view overlaid by attitude the task of lining up for the approach, boosting situational and performance data, or split so the right one-third of the awareness. Once below the cloud deck, maintaining a 3 deg. screen shows different pages, selected by drop-and-drag glideslope was simple using the flightpath vector and pitch menus from the “home” screen option on the PFD. On the scale on the PFD. On short final, placing the flightpath vector MFD, engine performance data are always shown on the left on the touchdown zone of the virtual runway ensured our side of the screen. main gear would meet the concrete in the physical touchDuring our pre-flight, Palmer demonstrated how the FMS down zone, an assertion confirmed by the view from the interface is largely executed on two pages—a Plan and a Fly windscreen and the chirp of the tires. c page. On the plan page, he entered our destination, altitude, AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 51

ZHUHAI 2014

Into Assembly

Comac, striving to fly the C919 by the end of 2015, is also planning an ARJ21 upgrade Bradley Perrett Beijing

W

ith its first C919 flight-test aircraft now in final assembly, Comac plans to roll out the aircraft in less than one year and is trying to prepare it for a first flight in late 2015.

Construction of the second flight-test aircraft is following about half a year behind the first.

For the 2014 Air Show China in Zhuhai Nov. 11-16, the C919 will appear again as a mock-up and models; but there is a good chance that one of its prototypes will overfly the 2016 show as China’s first production mainline airliner.

Comac has revised some of the specifications of the aircraft, which provided the launch airframe for the same CFM Leap 1 engine later chosen for the similarly sized Airbus A320neo. An extra row of six seats will be available in the C919’s high-density cabin arrangement, but the designed economic life has been shortened.

Bigger changes are in store for Comac’s earlier aircraft, the much delayed ARJ21 regional jet. The manufacturer now expects the ARJ21 will achieve airworthiness certification this year and adds that it is planning an update of the model.

Comac will not comment on its target for first delivery of the C919, however. In May, it said that would occur in 2018, 10 years after development was launched as a national program to advance the Chinese aeronautics industry.

Final assembly of the aircraft began on Sept. 19. As of mid-October, when Comac supplied photographs to Aviation Week from its new Shanghai factory, the C919 prototype’s forward and the Chengdu-built nose had been lowered into the assembly tool (see cover photo).

Delivery of the C919 fuselage sections from Comac’s structural suppliers, all subsidiaries of Avic, began in May. The last was the mid-aft fuselage, which, like the forward fuselage, was built by Avic’s Hongdu Aviation works at Nanchang.

The center fuselage and center wingbox come from Avic’s Xian plant, which is also building the left and right wing.

“Final assembly is proceeding steadily,” says Comac, adding that it is trying

to complete joining the structure by year-end, after which it will integrate the on-board systems. The roll-out is due in the third quarter of 2015.

Making a first flight around the end of next year is an ambition but seemingly not a definite expectation; the company says it is “striving” to do that.

Considering that the first aircraft may not be rolled out until September, the timing looks tight. Mitsubishi Aircraft, which rolled out its first MRJ regional jet on Oct. 18, is allowing about half a year for ground tests before flying (AW&ST Oct. 27, p. 34).

The latest of several C919 schedule slippages, announced in May, seems to have amounted to only a few months.

Just before that change in the plan, the first aircraft was due to be rolled out in June 2015 and fly four months later. When the program was launched in 2008, the first flight was scheduled for this year and first delivery in 2016, allowing eight years for development— which was generous by international standards but realistically so, considering the limited experience of the Chinese managers and engineers.

Comac will use six aircraft for flight testing, one more than originally planned. Parts for several of them are being made, the company says; the second aircraft is due to enter final assembly in the first half of next year.

Well aware that the major modules of early prototypes sometimes do not fit, Comac managers were a little nervous in awaiting delivery of the first C919’s major structural assemblies, program ofcials say. Asked whether mistakes have appeared in final assembly, Comac does not directly answer but says: “The problems of all fabrication methods have been resolved in the trial production phase” in the manufacturing of

52 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

The C919 nose will be fitted with a load-bearing windscreen frame.

COMAC PHOTOS

AviationWeek.com/awst

Avic’s Xian factories are building C919 center fuselages and wingboxes.

sample parts that began in 2009. “All parts being delivered have been passed by the Civil Aviation Administration of China [CAAC] and conform to the design requirements,” the company notes.

“For the manufacturing of C919 structural parts, Comac design and production staf and supplier production staf form technical, manufacturing and production teams. They collectively resolve production problems,” Comac adds.

In the U.S., CFM partners General Electric and Snecma began flight-testing the Leap engine on Oct. 6. The Leap 1A for Airbus and very similar 1C for Comac will be certified next year, says CFM. The C919 benefited from applying Leap 1A improvements to the earlier 1C, but the changes caused some of the delay in the Chinese program, a Comac ofcial says.

A more recent change is an increase in maximum seating to 174 from 168 in an all-economy arrangement. Comac also says the aircraft’s designed economic life has been reduced to 80,000 flight hours from 90,000. Standard twoclass seating for the C919 is 158.

The new factory, near Pudong International Airport, is “initially complete,” says Comac, apparently meaning that the plant is ready to begin work but is not fully equipped. By 2020, it will be able to build 150 C919s and 50 ARJ21 regional jets a year, the manufacturer says, declining to discuss its ramp-up plans.

Comac’s plant includes a final assembly hall in which a moving assembly line is “basically” installed. Another factory, though built for upstream work, is handling the final assembly of the first flying prototype, using automatic drilling and riveting equipment, an automatic system for aligning the modules, automatically guided vehicles and an aircraft movement system. “This is an automated assembly line of an advanced international standard,” says the manufacturer.

A composites factory is equipped AviationWeek.com/awst

with China’s largest autoclave, 5.5 meters (18 ft.) long, although Comac has decided not to use composites for large and difcult parts of the aircraft, such as the center wingbox.

Comac says customers have ordered 400 C919s. But the contracts have little binding efect, according to people who have seen some of them. And even if the order book comprised solid contracts, it would still have two shortcomings in the makeup of its customers. One is that they are all Chinese, with the exception of Gecas, which belongs to General Electric, a supplier. The impression, then, is that customers are ordering for national policy.

Then there is the curiously small quantity covered by the central government’s big three airlines—China Southern, Air China and China Eastern—to which the program must be looking as anchor customers. At the 2010 Zhuhai show, those three each ordered just five C919s, while Hainan Airlines, the private, fourth-ranked Chinese carrier, ordered 20.

Comac’s program was based on sales of 2,500 C919s. Even if only 1,000 are built, the big-three carriers will surely have to buy about 200 each. That assumes that the great bulk of C919 sales will be made in China—an increasingly realistic assumption, because the type has no clear path to endorsement of its airworthiness by the FAA or European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), as originally intended.

But the C919 is being developed to international airworthiness standards, says Comac. At first it seemed obvious that the FAA could endorse the type certificate from the CAAC, since the U.S. authority was in the process of monitoring the ARJ21 program to assess its Chinese counterpart’s airworthiness competence. Unfortunately, it still is. The ARJ21 is running eight years late, so the CAAC’s work on the C919 has not been recognized by the FAA. EASA has never been involved.

So where does that leave the C919?

“Getting an FAA or EASA certificate is still under discussion,” says Comac.

This is not just important for international sales of the C919; Chinese customers also want a Western stamp on the type certificate.

Flight-testing will be conducted mainly from a new base at Dongying

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 53

ZHUHAI 2014 that ARJ21 production quality has improved.

The Xian factory has everything ready for the increased rate, says Xu. The delivery dates for the 10 aircraft were not stated, but in the middle of this year Comac was planning to complete two ARJ21s in 2014, five in 2015,

eight in 2016, 15 in 2017 and 20 in 2018.

“The risk will be in going from eight to 15, especially since the C919 production preparations will be happening at the same time,” says the industry ofcial.

Comac has been contractually obliged to compensate suppliers for the lateness of the program. c

Avic proves its capacity for quality by making Airbus A320 outer wings.

AIRBUS

Shengli Airport in Shandong. Flighttest pilots and engineers also will be trained at the base, which Comac says will have “a delivery, maintenance and modification capability.” It will handle some ARJ21 flight-testing, as well.

Meanwhile, the ARJ21 is entering volume production. Comac said last month it had signed an order for 10 sets of airframe major assemblies with the Xian branch of Avic Aircraft. Xian builds the wing and fuselage sections for the aircraft.

Comac must now be fairly sure of the latest target, since it would not want to contract for volume production until it knew that the aircraft could be delivered according to the current design.

Under the shadow certification process, the FAA is expected to endorse the ARJ21’s CAAC type certificate, giving the ARJ21 regulatory acceptability in the markets of economically advanced countries. But after so many years of development, during which its technology has aged significantly, the type is unlikely to be a hot seller internationally. For example, its engine is the GE CF34-10, which Embraer is replacing on its next series of E Jets.

For an upgrade of the ARJ21, “we have already begun demonstration work and will fully go ahead after the type certificate has been issued,” Comac says. “This will mainly involve reductions in weight and drag. There will also be improvements in the avionics, flight controls and anti-icing system.”

The aircraft covered by the Avic Aircraft Xian contract will have serial numbers 120-129. Avic Aircraft is the large-airplane subsidiary of state aeronautics group Avic.

From this year, the factory is making many “technical quality improvements” in automatic riveting of fuselage panels, wingbox assembly, fuselage jigs and in detail assembly, says the branch company’s deputy general manager, Xu Chunlin. These and other measures, such as training, have greatly raised production stability and “have made an obvious improvement to product quality and production rate,” Xu is quoted as saying in Avic’s newspaper China Aviation News.

Earlier in the program, Comac was not satisfied with the quality of airframe modules supplied from Xian for flighttest aircraft. Around 2010, a problem was a bad fit between the center and outer wingboxes, says an industry official working on the program.

Comac endorses Xu’s statement

Focused on Variety Six years after its reorganization, diversified Avic still faces big challenges

Bradley Perrett Beijing

T

he big news at the 2008 Air Show China was a historic reorganization of the Chinese aeronautics industry. Avic I and Avic II, separated since 1999, were to be rejoined as Avic.

Their factories would be bundled to form focused subsidiaries such as Avicopter. Earlier in the year, Comac had been split from Avic I, taking some of the industry’s prime design and manufacturing capability with it.

This restructuring coincided with the Chinese government finally turning its budgetary attention to civil aircraft manufacturing, which for decades had played second fiddle to military aeronautics and, especially, the space industry. China had been launching satellites since 1970, and in more recent years for export customers, but Chinese civil aircraft were rarities, even domestically.

Six years later, Avic is handling a wide range of civil aircraft programs,

54 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

with a remarkable number of mostly secretive engine developments also coming into view. It still has challenges, however, beginning with its sheer size: It has 400,000 employees, many working in fields unrelated to building aircraft.

The specialist subsidiaries created focus, but at the same time the group is quite unfocused. The great variety of non-aviator products includes solar panels, motorcycles and watches, which cannot help concentrate management attention. And the group is hardly committed to eliminating this diversity: In August it said it would set up aviationthemed amusement parks. It is impossible to imagine a major Western aerospace manufacturer, such as Northrop Grumman, doing anything of the kind.

With so many workers, Avic’s managers often seem more interested in finding activities to keep people emAviationWeek.com/awst

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE BREITLING RACING TEAM AND NIGEL LAMB, 2014 RED BULL AIR RACE WORLD CHAMPION. COLT CHRONOGRAPH

ZHUHAI 2014 the time between overhauls of its drive components, say Western rivals. The Chinese manufacturer says it must get its product range ready by 2018, to take advantage of the opening of low-altitude airspace in China. Its latest product is the AC332 (see page 63).

General aviation subsidiary Caiga should have the greatest opportunity to enter the world market, since small aircraft are simpler and cheaper to develop. Also, Caiga is following what industry executives see as the very sensible path of buying foreign companies

for their expertise. Avic Avionics and Avic Electromechanical have strategies based on joint ventures with foreign companies. Again, that approach has always looked right.

But it is absolutely not available to Avic Engine or sibling Avic Commercial Aircraft Engines, the latter tasked with developing a Chinese turbofan for the C919. The applicability of aeronautical gas turbine technology to military aircraft means that Western engine companies cooperate only peripherally with China. c

A Bigger Turboprop Avic aims at a June 2017 first flight for the MA700 turboprop airliner Bradley Perrett Xian, China

B

y the middle of next year, Avic and its partners should move into detail design of the Xian MA700, the first all-new turboprop airliner in more than 30 years. The aircraft is due to enter service in 2019 as a larger alternative to the ATR 72 and Bombardier Q400 that features new propulsion technology.

Pratt & Whitney Canada promises that matching its PW150C engine to the highly efcient Dowty R504 propeller will “provide significant fuel-burn economics for the new aircraft.”

The characteristics of the aircraft, launched in December, are basically set, says Wang Chengkuan, president of the Xian branch of Avic Aircraft, part of the Avic group specializing in large airplanes. The MA700 will seat 78 passengers at a roomy 32-in. (81-cm) pitch, positioning it closer to meeting the emerging demand for larger-turboprop transports than the 1980s-era ATR 72s and Bombardier Q400s.

Avic signed Rockwell Collins to supply the Pro Line Fusion avionics suite in September, but supplier selection is not moving as quickly as Avic planned.

Last December, engine selection was due within “a few months” but did not happen until July. Avic hoped to choose the remaining suppliers by mid-October, but by late last month had made no new announcements.

56 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AVIC

ployed, rather than looking for profits through cost cuts. An astonished senior Western executive complains that his Avic counterparts ask for price increases for parts. “This is unheard of,” he says. “Parts prices don’t go up in civil aerospace; they only go down.”

Admittedly, Avic’s managers face a much worse problem with cost rises than Western managers are used to.

Because of China’s rapid economic growth, labor rates in its aerospace and airline industries have been rising by about 10% annually, at least until the gross domestic product’s increase slowed in the past few years. Steady appreciation of the yuan against the dollar exacerbated that problem. It has been simply impossible to cut costs as fast as wages have risen, say Avic plant managers, although one of the group’s top bosses tells Aviation Week that, in his opinion, Avic has room to multiply labor efciency many times.

Importantly, Avic is capable of world-class aircraft manufacturing quality, evidenced by the building of Airbus A320 outer wings by the Xian factories of Avic Aircraft, the group’s large-airplane subsidiary. Airbus, a necessarily demanding customer, has long expressed great satisfaction with the work. And it is notable that outer wingboxes are among the most challenging major assemblies of a commercial jet aircraft.

From the time it was formed, Avic Aircraft aimed to build its own commercial aircraft, the MA700 turboprop (see following article). In fact, Avic’s managers had long wanted to build China’s first mainline commercial aircraft; they were deeply disappointed that the government gave the program to Comac. Rivalry with Comac means Avic is very keen to execute the MA700 program well, industry executives say.

The group’s fighter, missile and drone subsidiary, Avic Aviation Techniques, shows great advances in technology— for example, in the J-20 fighter program (see page 57). On a smaller scale and with much less funding, Avicopter is the subsidiary that seems closest to presenting a big challenge to established Western manufacturers. The rotorcraft maker is planning to build a range of products with gross weights of 1-13 metric tons (2,000-29,000 lb.), plus the proposed super-size Advanced Heavy Lifter of up to 40 tons to be developed with Russian Helicopters.

Avicopter’s main hurdle is prolonging

Avic has basically settled the characteristics of the MA700.

Such delays cannot make achieving the rest of the schedule any easier. The joint-definition phase will see Avic and its suppliers work out development responsibilities for each party and should be completed by mid-2015, after more than five years of flight testing, Wang says. Then only two years is allowed for detail design, fabrication and ground testing before the first MA700 prototype flies in June 2017. The 2019 delivery target implies up to 30 months for flight testing, longer than usually needed.

By the time the MA700 enters detail design, the Comac ARJ21 regional jet should be certified, after six years of flight testing. That should pave the way for the FAA to recognize the comAviationWeek.com/awst

AviationWeek.com/awst

for aircraft of this size: Its image is projected from the top edge of the screen.

The traditional technology, a projector on the ceiling, may be hard to fit into the cockpit of a four-abreast transport.

For operators, a head-up display may ofer more opportunities to fly in poor weather, as authorities will allow the

pilots of aircraft with such equipment to descend lower before seeing the runways they are approaching. The CAAC is moving to require airlines to fit headup displays to their aircraft, where such equipment is available.

Rockwell Collins expects to have its system ready for the MA700 by 2017. c

Long Lance Unique J-20 could fit anti-access role Bill Sweetman Washington

The J-20 configuration is notable, with large in-plane canards located well ahead of the main wing.

C

opy, the latter with detonation cord to shatter the canopy for ejection. What appears to be a housing for an infrared search and track system has been added below the nose, and a missile-warning sensor fairing installed below the aft fuselage.

The new variant aircraft appeared slightly more than three years after the first flight of No. 2001, so some of the changes may reflect lessons from flight testing. Other changes represent a move toward a production or pre-production design. So far, there have been few indications as to when the J-20 will enter service: The Pentagon, in its latest annual report to Congress, says it is unlikely to be operational before 2018.

However, the appearance of the new aircraft tends to confirm that the design has proved sound so far; all four prototypes are now reported to be at Yanliang air base in Xian, the Chinese air force’s main test site. The question now is what role the J-20—which is not only the first Chinese stealth fighter but the largest tactical aircraft built in China—will perform in the future force.

Close examination of the J-20 shows it has no direct analogue in the West or in Russia. The dimensions can be estimated accurately from open-source satellite images, but its characteristics are sometimes mis-assessed through a focus on overall size. Details of avionVIA INTERNET

petence of the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) in assessing airworthiness to international standards. But Avic is not assuming that the FAA will automatically recognize a CAAC type certificate for the MA700.

It expects to have to separately satisfy the FAA, though Wang says the U.S. authority may want to review only some aspects of the design and verification process. Avic sees certification as one of its biggest challenges. Another is gaining acceptance of its brand. So while ATR expects to build more than 90 aircraft next year, Avic is assuming that MA700 production will reach a rate of just 50 a year. “We are conservative,” says Wang. Perhaps he is just being realistic in acknowledging that demonstrating reliability and efciency will take many years.

Pratt & Whitney Canada’s willingness to improve its engine was a key reason for its selection over RollsRoyce, which offered the AE2100, he says. Compared with the PW150A that powers the Q400, the PW150C will feature a third stage on the power turbine, an improved low-pressure compressor and a reduction gearbox modified for the Dowty propeller, the engine company says. This will improve operating economics and power reserve. A customized cockpit interface will cut pilot workload. Certification is due in 2018.

The engine looks powerful enough for a stretched version of the MA700, proposed to seat about 90, Wang says.

Avic seems not in a great rush to develop the 90-seater, however, despite turboprop operators globally calling for such an aircraft. A proposed 50-seat version able to fly from hot and high airfields may come first, Wang says.

The MA60 and MA600, current production versions of Avic’s Y-7 regional airliner, use the smaller PW127, the same engine found on the ATR 72.

Similarly, Avic extended an MA60 and MA600 relationship by contracting Rockwell Collins, supplier of their cockpit avionics, to provide the Pro Line Fusion suite for the MA700. As a result, the MA700 will share some commonality with the Mitsubishi Aircraft MRJ; it also uses the Pro Line Fusion suite.

The Rockwell Collins ofering attracted Avic in being sophisticated but not presenting high risk, says Wang, noting that other airframe companies have also chosen it. According to Rockwell Collins, the head-up display of the Pro Line Fusion suite ofers a key advantage

hengdu’s J-20 stealth fighter represents the pinnacle of China’s aerospace engineering, but its existence and development have posed mysteries since the unexpected appearance of the first prototype at the end of 2010, followed in May 2012 by the debut of a second, similar aircraft.

The past few months, however, have seen the first flights of a pair of significantly diferent J-20s, identified by the serial Nos. 2011 and 2012.

The most substantial design change in the new aircraft appears to be that the fuselage aft of the main landing gear is a bit more slender, with a deeper tunnel in the undersurface between the engines. The tailbooms that extend aft of the all-moving vertical tails are longer, and the lower fixed stabilizers are moved aft. The trailing-edge tips of the vertical tails and canards are cropped, and the leading-edge root extensions are straight rather than curved.

The top line of the outer wall of the diverterless supersonic inlet has been drooped, and the landing gear doors changed: The main doors now close after the gear has extended and the nose landing gear door has been reshaped.

The F-22-style one-piece frameless canopy on the early aircraft has given way to a separate windshield and can-

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 57

ZHUHAI 2014

Podcast Aviation Week editors discuss the design characteristics of the J-20.

AviationWeek.com/Check6

ics and materials remain uncertain.

The J-20’s wing and control surface layout is very diferent from that of the Lockheed Martin F-22, but the body layout is quite similar, with twin main weapon bays under the belly and side bays for rail-launched air-to-air missiles (AAMs), all located under and outside the inlet ducts. On both aircraft, the main landing gear is housed in the fuselage behind the weapon bays and the engines are close together. The big diference, however, is that the J-20 is Diferences between the newer J-20 configuration (left) and the first of two 9.5 ft. (17%) longer than the F-22, from aircraft (right) include a recontoured lower-aft fuselage and longer tailbooms, the nose to the engine nozzles. Most of with the ventral fins moved slightly aft. The leading-edge root extension of this is in the widest part of the fuselage, the new aircraft has a straight edge, and the canard and vertical stabilizer tips and since the weapon bays are similar are clipped. Electro-optical sensor housings are installed under the nose and in size, it is almost all available for fuel. beneath the right-hand side of the fuselage, aft of the weapon bays.

It is a reasonable estimate that the J-20 could have as much as 40% more internal fuel capacity than the F-22. The The paper addresses the design of a up moments. One way to resolve this, longer body will also improve fineness fighter with a delta wing, canards and the paper notes, is to use smaller, allratio, with benefits for transonic drag. leading-edge root extensions (Lerxes), moving surfaces. The J-20 resembles Despite the larger body, the empty and discusses how the three interact. the Sukhoi T-50 in being directionally weight of the J-20 may be close to that The J-20, unlike the J-10, has a broad unstable, and is actively controlled with of the F-22, largely because it has lessbody and the canard and wing are not the all-moving verticals. Song’s paper powerful engines without the heavy close-coupled. However, according to also says the canard layout provides two-dimensional thrust-vectoring the paper, the Lerx and canard, used positive post-stall recovery, without the nozzles of the F-22’s F119s. use of thrust vectoring.

The J-20 prototypes are The paper identifies supersonic J-20 vs. F-22 believed to be flying with cruise as a requirement for a nextJ-20 F-22 United Engine Corp. (UEC) generation fighter and often refers to Overall length (ft.)

66.8 62 AL-31F engines. The thrust the need to reduce supersonic drag.

Wingspan (ft.)

44.2 44.5 diference between the two The J-20’s supercruise performance designs is very large: The will nevertheless be strongly afected Wing area (sq. ft.)

840 840 F-22 has almost as much by engine technology. China may well Operating empty weight (lb.)

42,750 43,340 power in intermediate hope to acquire or emulate the techInternal fuel (lb.)

25,000 18,000 thrust as the J-20 does in nology being developed by Russia for Normal takeoff weight (lb.)

70,750 64,840 full afterburner, although the Su-35S and T-50. UEC’s 117S ennewer versions of the UEC Max. thrust (lb.)

55,000 70,000 gine, developed for the Su-35S, is more AL-31/117S/117 could close powerful than the AL-31F (32,000 lb.

Min. thrust (lb.)

34,250 52,000 the gap in later versions of maximum versus 27,500 lb. for the baClean-fuel fraction, normal T/O 0.35 0.28 the Chinese aircraft. sic AL-31F) and has a digital control Max. thrust-to-weight ratio, combat weight 0.94 1.25 The conventional circusystem. The T-50’s 117 engine is similar Military thrust-to-weight ratio, combat weight 0.59 0.93 lar nozzles and the aft-body to the 117S, but it is further uprated Wing loading at combat weight, lb./sq. ft.

69 66.5 shape are less conducive to 33,000 lb. thrust, and according to stealth than the F-22, as to a UEC engineer, the hot-end temSources: Lockheed Martin, AW&ST analysis is the case with the T-50. perature limits are increased, to allow This is most likely a conscious decithe engine to sustain maximum nontogether and in combination with a sion because a fast aircraft can tolerafterburning thrust to higher speeds. high degree of instability, can achieve ate a higher radar cross-section in the However, the J-20 will not match the maximum lift coefcients that are as aft quadrant. While some observers F-22’s thrust-to-weight ratio, even with high if not higher than those from a have suggested that canards are inan engine equivalent to the 117. close-coupled canard. compatible with stealth, an engineer The J-20’s weapon arrangement The paper also discusses the vertiwho was active in Lockheed Martin’s is similar to the F-22, except that the cal stabilizer design of a stealth configearly Joint Strike Fighter eforts says ventral bays are shorter and narrower, uration with outward-canted surfaces. the final quad-tail configuration was no and are apparently capable of accomFixed, canted tails are exposed to powstealthier than the earlier canard-delta modating only four weapons the size erful crossflows at high angles of attack, design. of the SD-10 AAM. However, they do because of the formation of vortices A detailed Chinese technical paper appear large enough to accommodate from the wings and canard. The result published in 2001 by Song Wencong, bigger folding-wing missiles—and Chiis that the tails can develop powerful designer of the Chengdu J-10, points to na is reported to be negotiating to buy moments, and because the tails are key aerodynamic features of the J-20. the Russian Kh-58UShKE, a Mach 4 canted, those forces will include pitch58 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

PHOTOS VIA INTERNET

anti-radar missile that is also intended for internal carriage on the T-50.

The side missile bays differ from those of the F-22 in that the doors can be closed after the missile rail has been extended, and have been seen with a missile—or test shape—with low-aspect-ratio wings and folding tails. So far, no gun has been seen on J-20s, nor has there been a sign of provision for one.

The J-20 design, therefore, is an air-to-air fighter with an emphasis on forward-aspect stealth, efcient highspeed aerodynamics and range, with a modest internal payload and more than adequate agility for self-defense. The aircraft has considerable potential for

development, because of its currently unsophisticated engines. But it is also large and expensive, and continued development of the J-10B shows that China plans to maintain a high-low mix of fighters for a long time to come.

This concept fits very well into an anti-access/area-denial strategy given China’s regional geography and the fact that the nation’s military and geopolitical ambitions are focused on the China Sea and its surrounding island chains. The U.S. has committed its armed forces to concentrate much of their funding on tactical fighters with a combat radius of 600 mi., much less than the distance from their bases to targets on the Chinese mainland, and has persuaded its allies to do the same.

As a result, operations are almost entirely dependent on two groups of aircraft: tankers and large intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft with long endurance. Under the “distributed control” concept favored by U.S. Air Force commanders as a hedge against electronic warfare, including cyberattacks, the ISR aircraft also have a control-andcommunications function. However,

both tankers and ISR aircraft are vulnerable to attack, and maintaining a defensive combat air patrol (CAP) over them at long range is also difcult.

The J-20’s primary mission, therefore, may be to use stealth and speed to break through the CAP and threaten vital tankers and ISR platforms. Its range gives it a “long lance” advantage—if the tankers, ISR aircraft and escorts have to stay out of the J-20’s range, the tactical aircraft that they support will not have the airborne radar cover or range needed to reach their targets.

Also, an anti-radar missile would give the J-20 some capability against shipping, even with internal weapons.

China’s new CM-400AKG and YJ-12 high-speed antiship missiles will not fit the J-20’s weapon bays, but could probably be carried under the wings, and future internal weapons will increase its ofensive capacity.

In a very broad sense, the J-20 could turn out to be an analogue to the Soviet-era Tu-22M2/3 Backfire bomber—an efcient and practical blend of low-risk technologies that generates options for its users and difcult problems for its adversaries. c

)RU RYHU D KDOI FHQWXU\ WKH (6&2 )OXLG &RQWUROV JURXS RI FRPSDQLHV KDYH SURYLGHG LQQRYDWLYH À XLG control solutions for mission critical systems.

PTI Technologies Inc., Crissair Inc., and VACCO Industries are committed to providing highly engineered technology driven solutions to a diverse group of end markets including commercial and business aerospace, space, defense, and industrial. As partner to the OEM community we provide costeffective solutions that contribute to enhanced safety, improved reliability, increased productivity and our customers’ success.

Engineered Products 9DOYHV ƒ 5HJXODWRUV ƒ +DQG SXPSV $FWXDWRUV ƒ 5HVHUYRLUV ƒ Micro-propulsion systems &RXSOLQJV ƒ $WWHQXDWRUV ƒ )LOWHUV

More than you expect

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 59

ZHUHAI 2014

In a late development, the Chinese government decided to bring the F-35-size Shenyang J-31 stealth fighter to Zhuhai, but missiles and electronics still head the nation’s export prospects.

Building Business China aims to become a total defense supplier PHOTOS VIA INTERNET

Richard D. Fisher, Jr. Washington

I

n March, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reported that China had risen to fourth place in global arms sales—displacing France—after pushing the U.K. into sixth place in 2013. The tenth Zhuhai show sees China emerging as a one-stop military aerospace provider, from surveillance satellites to 50-kg (110-lb.) small-diameter precision-guided munitions (PGM).

With the aid of massive government investments in its arms sector, and key 1998 reforms that favored and subsidized competition among redundant companies over consolidation, China has become able to ofer multiple families of products in many defense market segments, such as fielding four families of air-launched PGMs. China is still in the market for Russian aerospace technology, with deals for the Sukhoi Su-35 and Almaz-Antey S-400 surface-to-air missile (SAM) nearing completion. But having absorbed and in many cases emulated the systems that it has acquired since the early 1990s, China is now emerging as a formidable and lower-priced competitor to Russia, and is also becoming competitive on performance with European and American military products.

For China, the remaining barriers to entry into world markets include the lack of reliable, efcient indigenous aircraft engines; the domination of regional markets by established suppliers; little—if any—combat experience and Western suspicion, pressure and sanctions. South Korean media reports from Oct. 9 indicated that Washington vetoed a Zhuhai appearance by South Korea’s Black Eagles aerobatic team. The team flies the Korea Aerospace Industries T-50B, powered by a General Electric F404 turbofan. Another sign of suspicion toward China, with its reputation for computer network exploitation, is that the industry still mostly hands out paper

60 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

brochures rather than USB memory sticks at trade shows.

One Chinese response has been to vigorously market its aerospace and defense wares globally, becoming a major presence at key regional arms exhibitions like Idex in Abu Dhabi and the Dubai air show, and expanding its presence at shows in South Africa, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brazil, Peru, Chile and Turkey.

Traditional customers like Pakistan still account for many Chinese sales, but in September 2013 China won its first NATO-member competition. Turkey chose low-bidder China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp. (Casic) and its 125150-km (78-93-mi.)-range FD-2000/HQ-9 fourth-generation surface-to-air missile (SAM), defeating Almaz-Antey’s S-300 and Raytheon’s Patriot PAC-3. But that deal has all but foundered under pressure from the U.S. and its NATO allies.

Still, Turkey’s choice signaled China’s growing competitiveness in missile and space technology. Two of China’s major fourth-generation SAMs, the HQ-9 and the 50-km-range HQ-16A, are based respectively on technology from the AlmazAntey S-300PMU and Buk-M SAM systems, which China first purchased. Almaz-Antey has cooperated in the process because it has moved on to more-advanced systems like the S-400.

While they may not show up at Zhuhai, China, is working on SAMs comparable to Raytheon’s PAC-3 and SM-3 systems. But that’s not all: Due to subsidized competition, in 2012 land systems leader Norinco and air-to-air missile (AAM) maker Luoyang Electro-optic Technology Center introduced their 50-km-range Sky Dragon, using the active-guided DK-10 SAM derived from the latter’s SD-10A/PL-12 medium-range AAM. Like Russia, China is also developing and displaying very-high-frequency counterstealth radars.

China also has two families of export tactical ballistic missiles, Casic’s 280-km-range, truck-carried B-611M and a combination family comprising the vertically-launched 200-kmrange BP-12A and 150-km-range SY-400. Even though these appear to be modern, accurate and maneuverable, comparable in performance to but cheaper than the Russian Iskander, they have not sold outside China. (Iskander exports will not start until 2016, Russian ofcials said this summer.)

A Chinese source at the May 2013 Sitdef arms exhibition in Lima, Peru, remarked that they were “too expensive” for regional customers.

So far, China’s performance in combat aircraft exports has been less consistent than its sales of smaller-ticket items. Its two designated export fighters remain hobbled by the lack of orders from the Chinese air force, and its ability to export fighters and support them will remain dependent on Russian cooperation until China’s engine industry is mature.

Chengdu’s FC-1, or JF-17 as it is called by development partner Pakistan, is a single-engine $30-35 million fighter claimed to have 85-90% of the performance of the $70-90 million Lockheed Martin F-16C. A Block 2 version with a refueling probe is beginning production in Pakistan. The fate of a twin-seat FC-1S version revealed at the 2013 Paris air show is not clear, with Pakistani sources at the 2013 Dubai air show saying they did not need it.

AviationWeek.com/awst

JF-17/FC-1 production may reach 200 to 300 in Pakistan.

Over the last four years, countries like Egypt and Argentina have explored local co-production, while reports of interested potential buyers have included Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka and Venezuela.

If financially unstable Argentina does initiate a co-production program, it will likely be promoted via the nascent Union of South American Nations (Unasur) defense council—but this move might be viewed with dismay in London. Argentine industry ofcials said at the 2013 Paris air show that one reason for their interest in the FC-1 is that it could carry Casic’s CM-400AKG hypersonic antiship missile, revealed at the 2012 Zhuhai show. These could target Britain’s new aircraft carriers in the event of another conflict over the Falkland Islands. Pakistani sources say that reports that the CM400AKG is operational may refer to the land-attack version.

Zhuhai may ofer clarity regarding the other export fighter program, the Shenyang J-31 stealth fighter, which appeared in October 2012. Visible progress with the aircraft—close in size and configuration to the Lockheed Martin F-35, apart from twin engines—has been slower than with the bigger Chengdu J-20 (see page 57).

The Xian Y-20 four-turbofan heavy military transport will make its Zhuhai debut, according to Chinese state media reports. Two (or perhaps three) prototypes are flying. In August, Chinese reports noted that a PLA National Defense University study suggested that China should acquire up to 400 Y-20s.

China’s lack of production-ready modern engines impedes military aircraft development and sales. The Shenyang-Lim-

descendant of the MiG-21) and the twin-turbofan Hongdu L-15/JL-10, are in production for the air force.

China has used the Zhuhai show to showcase unmanned aerial vehicles and unmanned combat air vehicles, reflecting a broad investment strategy that has supported not only aircraft, helicopter and missile companies, but also modelairplane producers and universities to develop systems ranging from high-altitude long-endurance (HALE) systems to micro-UAVs. This Zhuhai show might provide new information on programs like Chengdu’s Global Hawk-like Long Haul Eagle revealed in 2008, or Guizhou’s unique box-wing Soar Dragon, first revealed at the 2006 Zhuhai show but seen on the Chengdu airfield in 2011. A smaller Guizhou box-wing UAV emerged in November 2013. That month also saw the first flight of the Shenyang-Hongdu LiJian, a delta UCAV prototype similar in size to the French Dassault Neuron.

The Chengdu Pterodactyl UCAV—similar in size to the U.S. General Atomics MQ-1 Predator—was shown releasing an air-to-surface weapon for the first time in August, at China’s Peace Mission 2014 exercises. This is part of a broad Chinese investment in airborne intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR), aimed at improving joint operations and the integration of artillery and missiles with airborne ISR and attack platforms.

Airborne early warning and control systems, like the Il-76based KJ-2000 and the KJ-200, with a Saab-style array on a modified Y-9 turboprop transport, are participating in more exercises. Yet a third AEW&C system, the KJ-500, is also entering PLA service. With a saucer radome on a Y-9 platform, the KJ-500 appears to be an updated version of the ZDK-03 purchased by Pakistan.

China’s missile and commercial-space prospects will be enhanced early in the 2020s when it is due to loft its own

The Xian Y-20 airlifter should be the biggest debutant at Zhuhai. Prototypes still have Russiansupplied D-30 engines. ing Taihang fighter turbofan has been in production since 2008 for Shenyang’s developments of the Sukhoi family (the J-11B, J-15 and J-16), but reports persist that it has still not achieved reliability targets. This may be forcing Chengdu to deliver the first production batch of single-engine J-10Bs— the first Chinese fighter with an active, electronically scanned array radar—with Russian Saturn AL-31 turbofans.

The smaller 8,600-kg-thrust Guizhou WS-13 Taishan has reportedly been flying on an FC-1 prototype since 2010, and a 10,000-kg-thrust upgrade may be under development, but Chinese sources have been reluctant to comment on the program’s status. Since January 2014, images have appeared of a Chinese high-bypass turbofan on an Ilyushin Il-76 testbed, perhaps the 14-ton-thrust “WS-20” slated for the Y-20, but its status is not known.

A key part of China’s combat aircraft strategy has been to address the trainer market, paving the way for moreadvanced aircraft, and the air force has acquired three advanced trainers to support the export push. The air force was at first reluctant to buy complex new trainers, but has flown the Hongdu K-8/JL-8 since the late 1990s. It has been purchased by 13 air forces. Two new supersonic trainers, the low-cost single-turbojet Guizhou FTC-2000/JL-9 (a distant AviationWeek.com/awst

120-ton+ space station, giving it the ability to share the prestige of spaceflight with countries not associated with the International Space Station. China unveiled plans in late September —in a presentation by Zhou Lini of the National University of Defense Technology to the International Astronautical Congress in Toronto—for an expansive space-station cooperation program. It is due to include training and transport of guest astronauts, science missions, docking by international spacecraft and even rescue missions in low Earth orbit.

China has made an impressive 108 space launches since 2006, but only 16 have carried commercial payloads. Just ten of those were made in China and only four were “dual-use” surveillance satellites. But on Oct. 5, Venezuela announced its purchase of a second Chinese-made Venezuelan Remote Sensing Satellite (VRSS-2), following the 2.5-meter (8-ft.)resolution VRSS-1 launched in September 2012. Since 2002, China’s DFH Satellite Corporation has ofered a radar satellite using a Russian-derived radar antenna, but has made no sales. Several Chinese companies and universities have designed micro and nano-satellites and Casic may say more at Zhuhai about its new Kuaizhou mobile, rapid-response launch vehicle. It is reported to be based on solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile technology, and is intended for small satellites. c AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 61

ZHUHAI 2014

Under Pressure Even with economical new launchers, Chinese ofcials doubt they can match SpaceX Bradley Perrett Beijing

F

All these economies are not enough, or more than 40 years, China it seems. As early as 2010, managers of has relied on a rocket technology CASC’s launcher subsidiary, CALT, exthe rest of the world has largely pressed concern about SpaceX’s pricdropped for main space-launch propules, suggesting that the U.S. company sion. But now, moving from hydrazine was imperiling a strategy based on propellant and its easily developed what they had previously thought were engines to the harder technology of China’s unbeatably low costs. More rekerosene, liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, the Chinese industry is introducing a family of launchChina’s new launchers share ers that should be more effiengines and airframe modules. cient and therefore more cost efective.

Consistent with that, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) sees its most intense competition for low-Earth orbit (LEO) space launch services coming from China. But it looks like CASC, the Chinese government’s main space industrial group, cannot match SpaceX when it comes to cost. This is especially important for what will probably be the key member of the new Chinese family, the Long March 7, a mediumheavy launcher in the class of LM-5 LM-6 LM-7 the SpaceX Falcon 9 that, acGTO SSO (700 km) LEO cording to the 2013 schedule, 14 tons 500 kg 13.5 tons was due to fly this year.

CHINA ACADEMY OF LAUNCH VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY The new family has three cently, they have been saying directly members. The largest, the Long March that they cannot match SpaceX, notes 5, has a core propelled by engines Phil Smith of consultancy Tauri Group. burning liquid hydrogen with liquid The Falcon 9 can deliver 13.15 metoxygen, but otherwise the family is ric tons to LEO; the equivalent Long based largely on core stages and boostMarch 7 version, with two engines of ers sharing the same kerosene-fueled 260,000-lb. thrust in the core first stage engines and airframe modules. One of and one in each of four boosters, is inthe modules, serving as the core first tended to throw 13.5 tons to LEO, the and second stages of the Long March main market in which the Chinese can 7 and the first stage of its little sibling, bid for international business. SpaceX Long March 6, has a diameter of 3.35 quotes a standard price of $61.2 milmeters (11 ft.). That is the standard lion for a launch in 2016. CASC has not diameter of current launchers, Long published a price for the Long March 7, March 2, 3 and 4, so much of the existbut Tauri says that the most powerful ing fabrication machinery can be used. of the current Chinese launchers, the While engine and airframe costs are Long March 3B—capable of launching thereby maximized, fuel and launch12 tons to low Earth orbit—is $70 milrelated expenses are reduced by elimilion a shot. nating hydrazine, a toxic propellant that The diference does not appear to be is costly to make and handle and is no great, raising the question of why the longer used for first and second stages Chinese are concerned. in other countries.

62 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

Part of CASC’s problem must be that it has to recover development costs. And the Long March 7’s new components, especially its engines, will be expensive at first, when few have been made and the production rate is low. Military launches would help push the Long March 7 along the learning curve—if the generals are prepared to risk their satellites on a new rocket.

Labor rates in China are low by Western standards, but factories with the entrenched culture of monopoly state suppliers to a Communist military are not known for their efciency.

Also, CASC is building a new launch base on Hainan, an island that afords the launch benefits of a latitude of only about 18 deg. north. The base may have been paid for by the military, CASC’s main customer. If not, then it is probably burdening the launcher program.

Until last year, the Long March 7 was scheduled to fly in 2013. The first launch was then pushed to 2014. The year is not over yet, but there has been little activity to suggest that a first flight is imminent. Indeed, CASC has still been involved with major development aspects in recent months. That work may give a clue to difculties that have been encountered.

In particular, CASC said in July that the propulsion system of the Long March 7 had passed a second test that had mainly validated what it called the system for high-pressure supply (of propellant, presumably) and the “compatibility with the engine, control system, measurement system and launch ground support system.” Developers implemented more than 10 changes to address weak links revealed in a first test, CASC says. “The whole test program is normal,” it adds. “All test data is matching predictions. The changes have been efective.” This was also the last test for the first stage, indicating that its development is complete, the manufacturer says. Last year a senior CALT ofcial said the engines for the new family were ready and were not the cause of delays, although he did not say what was.

Long March 7 tests continued in August, when CASC reported that the low-temperature gas tank of the Long March 7 booster had successfully undergone a blast test.

CASC’s full name is China Aerospace Science & Technology Corp. and CALT’s is China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology. c AviationWeek.com/awst

Disappointingly Slow China is making little progress in opening its skies to fixed-wing general aviation Bradley Perrett Beijing

“O

BRADLEY PERRETT/AW&ST

nly thunder, no rain,” the Chinese say when they mean “all talk, no action.” For more than five years, China has been talking about opening its low-altitude airspace. But so far as fixed-wing aviation goes, all that noise in the heavens has been accompanied by just a sprinkling of precipitation.

When the government, after much debate, adopted a policy in 2010 to encourage general aviation and allocate the needed airspace, operators and manufacturers had the impression, or

for them has been opened, the general rule across China remains as it always has been: You cannot simply file a flight plan, hop into your airplane and fly across the country from one airfield to another at, say, 2,000 meters (6,600 ft.). Even where airspace has been opened, the authorities have often failed to issue detailed procedures for its use.

Figures compiled by Avic show the results. About threequarters of Chinese general aviation last year, measured by flight hours, was for pilot training, an urgently needed activity that can be largely restricted to airspace close to the field at which it is based. Of the rest, more than half involved flying for agriculture, policing, power-line inspection and so on. Only 13% was for private travel, almost all of which was most probably conducted in business jets.

Private companies, even those that handle helicopters, are pretty tightly regulated. Private helicopter transport is possible, because, with some difculty, the air force can be persuaded to designate short airways with a ceiling of 300 meters—for example, from one commercial airport to another. To use the airway, a flight plan must be filed by 3 p.m. on the day before flight, as is typically the case for business jets in China.

Things become much harder if the customer needs to fly to a new destination—say, a factory he or she is building in a

hope, that by the end of the 2011-15 planning period, private airplanes would be viable across much of the country. Instead, it seems, the acknowledged economic value of that aspect of general aviation has been largely unable to overcome the state’s deep instinct for control. Personal flying is an exercise of freedom. The Chinese government, and especially the military ofcers who control the skies, are not much interested in freedom.

“Progress has been much slower than we hoped,” says a China-based manager for a Western general aviation airplane maker. “Frankly, there has been very little progress.”

Chinese helicopter operations are developing far faster, and manufacturers seem to have good reason for optimism about helicopter sales. Avic rotary-wing specialist Avicopter is striving to get products ready as soon as possible so foreigners do not take the whole market. Its latest project is the 3.1-metricton (6,800-lb.) AC332, due to go into service in 2018.

The reasons rotorcraft operations are progressing faster are readily apparent. Many helicopter uses involve supporting state functions, such as policing and rescue, so the authorities are directly in control. Helicopters do not fly far and therefore need little airspace, so it is not hard to meet their needs. And they do not have to fly high, raising few fears of people peering into military bases.

Far above them, business jets are increasingly common, but they are treated as part of commercial aviation. They must share the inadequate airways the military allocates to airlines and fly between commercial airports. They cannot simply take the direct route that best suits the mission, nor even fly above the commercial trafc, which most are quite capable of doing.

In between those levels is the unluckiest sub-sector, operations of private fixed-wing propeller aircraft. While trial space

AviationWeek.com/awst

Helicopters face fewer

restrictions in China town with no airport. “Then than fixed-wing genyou have to do a lot of work,” eral aviation. Avicopter is says the general manager of a helicopter operating company responding with products in a southern province. First the such as the AC332. operator applies to an air force ofce for permission to use a new landing spot. If that is forthcoming, approval from another air force ofce is needed for a temporary route to the landing spot; when this is in hand, the issue is passed to the Civil Aviation Administration of China to administer. Altogether, it takes 7-10 days.

“Sometimes we get inquiries from people who want to fly in three days and we just have to tell them it cannot be done,” says the general manager.

The good news is that if the temporary route is repeatedly used, it can be recognized as a permanent one. There is a trend to allow helicopter operations in more places. And the authorities are tending to be less strict. As a result, says Hong Kong consultancy Asian Sky Group, helicopter numbers in China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan have grown by 20% annually over the past four years; some acceleration is underway.

So in this area, at least, the much discussed opening of lowaltitude airspace is a reality. But the way the authorities are handling helicopter flights by specialist operating companies hardly suggests that private fixed-wing flying, if it ever becomes widespread, will be easy. c AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 63

COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT UPDATE

T

What’s Coming in 2015

wo aircraft models key for the short- and medium-haul market are in flight tests and will be for at least the first half of 2015.

Airbus flew its A320neo for the first time earlier this fall and is quickly building up test hours so the aircraft can be delivered to its first customer, Qatar Airways, in the third quarter of 2015. Airbus initially launched the aircraft after airlines demanded a more fuel-efficient narrowbody and Bombardier had decided to build its CSeries, which competes with the smallest version of the A320neo family, the A319neo, and to an extent the A320neo.

The CSeries is also in flight tests, but was grounded for around three months in 2014 as Bombardier and Pratt & Whitney dealt with the fallout from an uncontained engine failure during taxi tests. At the same time, Bombardier is working to bring the larger version of the CSeries, the CS300, to flight-test.

Next year also will see the advent of larger twin widebodies. Boeing started deliveries of the 787-9 this year, and the aircraft will be seen in greater numbers as production is ramped up next year. Airbus is introducing the A350-900 following its first delivery to Qatar Airways.

Both manufacturers are working hard on the largest versions of their new twinjet families—the 787-10 and A350-1000.

The two companies also are developing new variants of the

A330, the A330neo; and of the 777, the 777X family. Airbus has announced a long-range version of the A321, which will be among the smallest passenger aircraft flying transatlantic routes. At the other end of the spectrum, Airbus is pressed by key customer Emirates to launch a reengined A380, and Boeing will have to review production rates of its slow-selling 747-8.

As for the regional aircraft sector, it is heading for major technology upgrades. The Mitsubishi Regional Jet (MRJ), rolled out late last month, and is expected to fly for the first time in 2015. It marks the return of a Japanese product to the commercial aircraft market. The MRJ will be competing against new versions of the Embraer 170/190 family, the E-2s, of which the first parts have been produced.

The aircraft will be in full development in 2015.

China’s Comac ARJ21, which has been in development for more than 13 years, is expected to be delivered to Chengdu Airlines in early summer. However, the program has experienced multiple delays totaling eight years. The Comac C919 narrowbody is also scheduled to fly for the first time next year.

Its Russian competitor, the MS-21, also is nearing first flight.

The following profiles were compiled by Forecast International, which is also a resource for AW&ST’s Aerospace 2015, which will be published as a double issue dated Dec. 29, 2014/Jan. 5, 2015.

—Jens Flottau

Airbus A318 The A318 is a twin-engine, 107-132-passenger narrowbody jetliner. Initial fight occurred in January 2002. The European Joint Aviation Authorities certifed the A318 (with CFM56 engines) in May 2003, followed by FAA certifcation a month later. A318 deliveries began in July 2003; 79 aircraft were produced through 2013. A318s are powered by two 21,600-23,800-lb.-thrust turbofan engines, either the Pratt & Whitney PW6000 or CFM56-5B. Airbus A319/A320/A321 These models, along with the A318, make up the Airbus A320 family of twinturbofan, narrowbody airliners. The initial model was the A320, which made its frst fight in February 1987. A320 deliveries began in 1988, followed by the stretched A321 in 1994 and the shortened A319 in 1996. All three original models are available with CFM56 or International Aero Engines V2500 engines. The A319 typically seats 124 passengers, the A320 carries 150, and the A321 seats 185. Through 2013, Airbus produced 1,395 A319s, 3,544 A320s and 877 A321s. Direct competition for the A320 family is the Boeing 737 series and the Bombardier CSeries. In December 2010, Airbus launched the NEO (New Engine Option) line of reengined A320 family aircraft.

The NEO variants are offered with either Pratt & Whitney PW1100G-JM or CF Leap-1A engines. The A320neo’s seating capacity will be 189, while the A321neo will accommodate 240 passengers in an all-economy layout. Deliveries are scheduled to begin in 2016. Airbus will continue to offer its baseline A319/A320/A321 models (with the traditional engine options). Including baseline and NEO models, production of 5,421 A319/A320/A321 aircraft is forecast from 2014 through 2023.

Airbus A330 Airbus developed the A330 twin-engine, widebody commercial passenger transport to replace aircraft such as the A300, DC-10-10 and L-1011. An A330 prototype frst few in November 1992, with customer deliveries following in December 1993. Customers have a choice of turbofan engines in the 64,000-72,000-lb.-thrust class: the GE CF6-80E1, Pratt & Whitney PW4000 or Rolls-Royce Trent 700. Three A330 models are available. The A330-300 seats 335 passengers in two classes, or 295 in three classes. The A330-200 seats 293 in two classes, or 253 in three. Deliveries of the third model, the A330-200F freighter, began in 2010. Through 2013, 519 A330-200s, 497 A330-300s and 25 A330-200Fs were produced. At the 2014 Farnborough air show, Airbus announced the A330neo program, which, like the A320neo effort, involves installation of new, more-effcient engines on a popular transport. The program comprises two versions: the A330-800neo and -900neo, both of which will use the Rolls-Royce Trent 7000 turbofan engine. The -800neo retains the -200’s fuselage length, while the -900neo uses the longer fuselage of the -300. The 42-month development of the A330neo is expected to have frst deliveries in the fourth quarter of 2017. Production of 336 A330 series aircraft is forecast for 2014-18, with production likely to phase out during that timeframe in favor of the A330neo. The reengined program is expected to see production of 640 units between 2016 and 2023. The A330 competes with the Boeing 787.

Prepared in conjunction with Forecast International Inc., Newtown, Connecticut For more information, contact Ray Peterson, Forecast International’s vice president for research and editorial services at +1 (203) 426-0800, or email him at ray.peterson@forecast1.com 64 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

Airbus A340 The A340 is a four-engine, intercontinental, widebody commercial transport aircraft. A prototype few in October 1991, and deliveries began in January 1993. The A340-200 and -300 were certifcated by the European Joint Aviation Authorities in December 1992 and the FAA in February 1993. Both models are powered by four 31,200-34,000-lb.-thrust CFM56-5C4 turbofans. Two newer models, the longer-range -500 and the stretched -600, are powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 500s. Typical seating for the -200, -300, -500 and -600 is 262, 295, 313 and 380 passengers, respectively. Airbus delivered 378 A340s through 2013.

Airbus A350 Currently in development, the A350 is a twin-engine, widebody jetliner intended to compete with Boeing’s 787 and 777. The A350 is powered by Rolls-Royce Trent XWB engines rated in the 75,000-97,000-lb.thrust range, and will have a cruise speed of around Mach 0.85. Three basic versions are being marketed: the -800, -900 and -1000. Depending on the version, the A350 seats 276-369 passengers, and will have a range of 8,1008,500 nm. The maiden fight occurred in June 2013. Type certifcation is expected in late 2014, -900 service entry in the same timeframe. Forecast International projects about 1,800 A350s will be produced through 2023.

Airbus A380 In developing the 525-passenger A380, Airbus chose to leap past Boeing’s 747 in capacity class.

Boeing markets the 747-8 to compete with the A380 indirectly, but no direct competition to the A380 exists in the 500-plus-seat market. The A380 is powered by four turbofan engines rated at 70,000-76,500 lb. thrust each, and can be outftted with either the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 or GE/Pratt & Whitney Engine Alliance GP7200. Airbus currently produces only a passenger version of the A380. First fight occurred in 2005, with 122 A380s produced through 2013. Production of 292 A380s is forecast for the 2014-23 timeframe.

Airbus C212 The C212 is an unpressurized, twin-turboprop-powered military transport with room for up to 25 fully equipped troops or a payload of up to 6,504 lb. Along with transport duties, the aircraft has seen popularity in a maritime patrol role. Developed by Spain’s CASA, and once known as the Aviocar, the C212 made its frst fight in March 1971; deliveries began in May 1974. Some 477 C-212s (of all versions) were built through 2013, including about 110 aircraft assembled by Indonesian Aerospace (IAe). The C212-200 model is powered by two Honeywell TPE331-10R-511C or -512C engines rated 900 shp each. The -300 uses two TPE331-10R-513Cs, also rated at 900 shp each. The -400 employs two TPE331-12JR-701C engines rated at 925 shp each. Production and assembly of the -400 have been transferred to IAe, which also builds the NC212-200 model. Airbus Military (now Airbus Defense and Space) and IAe launched a joint effort in November 2012 to develop an improved C212 version, dubbed the NC212i.

Derived from the C212-400, the NC212i will feature reduced weight and new digital avionics. It will accommodate 28 passengers, compared to 25 in the current -400. The NC212i will be certifed by a supplement to the existing C212 type certifcate. IAe is to perform fnal assembly of the NC212i. Production of six NC212-200 and 14 NC212i aircraft for the military market is forecast for the 2014-23 timeframe.

Aircraft Industries L-410 The L-410 is a 15-19-passenger, unpressurized, twin-turboprop-powered, regional/ utility transport aircraft. The current-production L-410UVP-E20 model is powered by two GE M601 engines. Under development is an improved variant called the L-410 NG that will feature GE H85-200 engines, Avio AV 725 fveblade propellers, a new wing and a new glass cockpit. As a frst step toward development of the NG model, Aircraft Industries is integrating the H80-200 engine and the AV 725 propellers into the L-410UVP-E20. More than 1,100 L-410s have been produced. Approximately 170 are forecast for production during the next 10 years.

Antonov An-28/An-38/PZL Mielec M28 The An-28 and An-38 are twin-turboprop utility/transport aircraft.

First fight of the An-28 occurred in 1969, with temporary Soviet certifcation following in 1978 and full certifcation in 1986. A Westernized version of the An-28, the PZL Mielec M28, made its frst fight in 1993 and received FAA certifcation in 2004. A stretched An-28 version, the An-38, made its frst fight in 1994 and received Russian certifcation in 1997. The An-28 is powered by two PZL Rzeszow TWD-10B/PZL-10S engines, with the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-65B powering the M28. Honeywell TPE331-14GR turboprops power the An-38-100/-120 models, while Omsk TVD-20 engines equip the An-38-200. Approximately 194 An-28s, 62 PT6A-powered M28s and nine An-38s were produced through 2013. The An-28 and An-38 are no longer in production, while the M28 is still being manufactured. Its principal competition comes from the Aircraft Industries L-410 and the Viking Air Twin Otter. Nine civil M28s are forecast for production through 2023.

Antonov An-124/An-225 The An-124 is a four-engine, intercontinental-range, heavy-lift cargo transport, and the An-225 is a six-engine, heavy-lift jet designed to carry the Soviet shuttle orbiter Buran. Initial fight of a production An-124 prototype took place in 1982 and commercial operation began in 1986. The An-124 is powered by four Ivchenko-Progress D-18T turbofan engines, while the An-225 uses six. Fifty-fve An-124s and one An-225 have been produced to date.

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 65

COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT UPDATE Antonov An-140 The Antonov An-140 is a twin-engine transport primarily used as a commercial regional airliner seating 52 passengers, but it is also employed by the Russian Ministry of Defense. The aircraft is powered by Motor Sich TV3-117VMA-SBM1 turboprop engines, 2,500 shp each, although Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127As (also 2,500 shp) may be used as alternatives. First An-140 fight occurred in 1997, and an estimated 31 units have been built to date. The Aviacor plant in Samara, Russia, also manufactures the An-140, and Iran’s HESA offers a license-built An-140 “Oghab” maritime patrol aircraft variant.

Antonov An-148/An-158 The An-148 is a twin-engine regional jet designed to serve the 70-80-seat market.

First fight of the An-148 took place in 2004, with type certifcation by Russia and Ukraine following in 2007. Power for the aircraft comes from two Ivchenko-Progress D436-148 turbofan engines. Three test aircraft and approximately 15 production aircraft were manufactured through 2013, and an additional 62 are forecast through 2023. A stretched, 99-passenger An-158 version powered by D436-148 engines frst few in 2010. Cubana leased three An158s through South America Aircraft Leasing in 2013.

ATR 42/ATR 72 The ATR series are turboprop-powered regional transport aircraft frst developed in 1981 by the European joint venture formed by Aerospatiale (now Airbus Group) and Aeritalia (now Alenia Aermacchi, part of the Finmeccanica group). The ATR 42’s frst delivery occurred in 1985, followed by the ATR 72 in 1989. The latest versions are the ATR 42-600 and the ATR 72-600. Both -600 variants are powered by a pair of Pratt & Whitney PW127M engines, rated at 2,400-2,750 shp each. Through 2013, ATR delivered 429 ATR 42s and 678 ATR 72s.

Production of 667 ATR series aircraft is forecast for 2014-23.

Avic Xian MA60/MA600 The 52-60-passenger MA60 twin-turboprop transport aircraft is a stretched version of the Xian Y7-200A, which in turn is a variation on the Antonov An-24. The aircraft is powered by two 2,750-shp Pratt & Whitney Canada PW127J engines. Initial fight and delivery of the MA60 took place in 2000. A freighter version, the MA60-500, is also marketed. In May 2010, a new variant, the MA600, was awarded certifcation by the Civil Aviation Administration of China. The MA600 features reduced weight, an upgraded cabin, new avionics (the Rockwell Collins Pro Line 21 suite) and a host of other improvements. Through 2013, Xian produced 91 MA60s and fve MA600s.

Forecast International expects 128 MA60/MA600 aircraft to be built for the civil market in 2014-2023.

Avic Xian MA700 Xian’s parent frm Avic formally launched full-scale development of the new MA700 turboprop airliner in December 2013. Program plans call for preliminary design review by the end of this year, frst fight in 2016, Chinese certifcation in 2018 and service entry in 2019. Certifcation from the European Aviation Safety Agency or the FAA also will be pursued, achievement of which would enable the MA700 to penetrate markets beyond those currently served by the MA60 or MA600. Avic envisions a family of three MA700 versions. The lead variant will seat 78 passengers. A stretched version would accommodate 90 passengers and a smaller version, 50. Maximum takeoff weight of the baseline 78-seater is 58,423 lb. Range with 78 passengers is 918 nm, although Avic has indicated the aircraft is being positioned for use primarily on 432-nm routes. The MA700 is to be built mostly of aluminum; composites will probably account for less than 10% of the structure. The aircraft is to be equipped with fy-by-wire fight controls. In July, Avic selected the Pratt & Whitney Canada PW150C turboprop engine to power the twin-engine MA700.

Beechcraft King Air Beech launched the King Air series of 8-12-seat, twin-turboprop aircraft in 1963. Since then, numerous variants have appeared. Total production amounted to 6,449 aircraft through 2013. Beechcraft, which Textron acquired last March and operates along with Cessna in a new segment called Textron Aviation, markets the King Air C90GTx, King Air 250 and King Air 350i. The C90GTx is powered by two Pratt & Whitney PT6A-135s producing 550 shp each. The 250 is powered by PT6A-52 engines rated at 850 shp each and the 350i is equipped with two 1,050-shp PT6A-60As. Some 1,302 King Airs are expected to be produced in 2014-23.

Boeing 737 The 737 series is a family of twin-engine, narrowbody commercial transports. Seating capacity varies depending on the model, though the most typical two-class confgurations are 126 passengers for the 737-700, 162 for the 737-800 and 180 for the 737-900ER. All three models, which are the current production versions, are powered by two CFM56-7 turbofans. The frst 737 few in April 1967 and received FAA certifcation in December 1967.

Through January 2014, Boeing delivered 7,900 aircraft in the 737 family, including 140 Boeing Business Jets and 19 737-based T-43 navigation trainers for the U.S. Air Force. In response to the Airbus A320neo, Boeing launched its reengining program, dubbed 737 MAX, in August 2011. The MAX program involves ftting the current 737 models with new CFM Leap-1B engines. These models will be redesignated the MAX 7, MAX 8 and MAX 9. Boeing will use eight aircraft for testing, including four MAX 8s and two each of the MAX 7 and MAX 9. First fight is planned for 2016.

Service entry is scheduled for 2017 with launch customer Southwest Airlines, which has ordered 30 MAX 7s and 170 MAX 8s. In September, Boeing launched the 737 MAX 200 with a commitment from Ryanair for 100 airplanes. A variant of the MAX 8, the MAX 200 will accommodate up to 200 seats. Boeing is projected to manufacture 5,291 737s in 2014-23. The 737 competes directly with the Airbus A320 family and the Bombardier CSeries.

66 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

Boeing 747 The 747 is an intercontinental widebody commercial transport aircraft powered by four turbofan engines. First fight and certifcation occurred in 1969. In February 2010, Boeing conducted the maiden fight of the 747-8 series, which includes the 747-8 Intercontinental passenger model and the 747-8 Freighter. Both are equipped with General Electric GEnx engines rated at 66,500 lb. thrust each. The 747-8I is stretched 18 ft. compared to the 747-400 to accommodate 467 seats in a three-class confguration. The frst 747-8F delivery, to launch customer Cargolux, occurred in September 2011. Through 2013, Boeing delivered 64 747-8s and 1,418 747s of earlier types, including 694-400s. Production of 72 747-8s is forecast for 2014-23. The 747â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s primary competitor is the Airbus A380.

Boeing 767 A prototype of this twin-engine, widebody commercial transport aircraft was rolled out in August 1981, with frst fight occurring the following month; through 2013, Boeing produced 1,110 767s. Only two civil 767 versions are in production: the extended-range 767-300ER passenger model and 767-300F freighter. The 767-300ER seats 218 passengers in a three-class layout or up to 350 in one class, and has a maximum range of 5,990 nm. The -300ER is available with a choice of GE CF6-80C2 or Pratt & Whitney PW4000 engines. The -300F is powered by the CF6-80C2. Boeingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new 787 will essentially replace the 767 in the companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commercial airliner product line. Exclusive of militarized models, production of approximately 65 767s is forecast for 2014-23.

Boeing 777 The 777 is a twin-engine, widebody jetliner. First fight occurred in June 1994, followed by certifcation in April 1995 for the Pratt & Whitney-powered version. Deliveries began in June 1995. The 777-200ER seats 301-440 passengers, and is powered by PW4000, Trent 800 or GE90 turbofans rated at 84,000-95,000 lb. thrust each. Two newer versions are the 777-200LR and 777-300ER. The -200LR, which seats 301 passengers in three classes, is powered by 110,100-lb.-thrust GE90-110B1 or 115,300-lb.-thrust GE90-115BL turbofans. The -300ER seats 386 people in three classes, and is equipped with 115,300-lb.-thrust GE90-115B engines. A freighter variant, based on the -200LR, is also available. In November 2013, Boeing launched the 777X at the Dubai air show, with 259 commitments from four customers. Production is scheduled to begin in 2017, with frst delivery slated for 2020. The 777X family includes the 777-8X, with seating for 350 passengers and a range of 9,300 nm. The 777-9X, which Boeing says will have the lowest operating cost per seat of any commercial airplane, will have a range of 8,200 nm and seat more than 400 passengers. The GE Aviation GE9X turbofan will power both models. A unique feature of the 777X will be folding wingtips, which will reduce the wingspan by about 20 ft. and allow the model to use existing 777 gates. A total of 1,164 777s were produced through 2013, and production of another 968 is forecast for 2014-23. The new Airbus A350 is the 777â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s main competition.

)HEUXDU\ 'XEDL :RUOG 7UDGH &HQWUH 'XEDL 8$(

&2 /2&$7(' :,7+

The regionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s leading MRO exhibition and conference for commercial aviation maintenance.

(1*$*( Foster new relationships, strengthen existing ones, and expand your reach across the MRO community /($51 Hear best practices, case studies, and proven ways to overcome your most pressing business challenges ',6&29(5 Get hands-on with the latest technologies and services that will translate into solutions and savings for your organization

*HW \RXU )5(( H[KLELWLRQ KDOO SDVV QRZ DW ZZZ DYLDWLRQZHHN FRP PURPLGHDVW AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 67

COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT UPDATE Boeing 787 The 787 Dreamliner is a family of twin-engine widebody airliners. Three versions are marketed. The 787-8 carries 210-250 passengers and has a range of 7,650-8,200 nm. The 20-ft.-longer 787-9 carries 250-290 passengers and has a range of 8,000-8,500 nm. The 787-10 is stretched 18 ft. beyond the 787-9. All three models are available with either two Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 or General Electric GEnx turbofans. The Dreamliner received certifcation in August 2011, followed by delivery to Japan’s All Nippon Airways of the frst 787-8 the following month. Delivery of the frst 787-9 to launch customer Air New Zealand occurred in July 2014. Boeing announced in July 2014 that fnal assembly of the 787-10 will take place exclusively in North Charleston, South Carolina; 787-8s and 787-9s are built in Everett, Washington, and North Charleston. Design of the 787-10 is underway in Everett, with fnal assembly of the frst one scheduled to begin in South Carolina in 2017. Production of 1,424 787s is forecast through 2023. The Dreamliner’s main competition is the forthcoming Airbus A350 and A330neo.

Bombardier CRJ Series The CRJ series is a family of twin-engine, 44-100-seat regional jets. The initial model was the 50-seat CRJ100, which frst few in May 1991; deliveries began in October 1992. The CRJ100 was replaced by the 50-seat CRJ200, which is powered by 9,220-lb.-thrust GE CF34-3B1 turbofans. Other variants are: the 44-seat CRJ440, also powered by CF34-3B1s; the 64-78-seat CRJ700, powered by 13,790-lb.-thrust CF34-8C5s; and the 86-90-seat CRJ900, powered by 14,255-lb.-thrust CF34-8C5s. Bombardier’s Challenger 850 business jet/corporate shuttle is based on the 50-seat CRJ200LR. The newest aircraft in the CRJ series, the CRJ1000, is a stretch of the CRJ900, allowing a 100-passenger confguration. It made its frst fight in September 2008, with certifcation following in December 2010. The CRJ100, CRJ200 and CRJ440 are no longer in production. In May 2007, Bombardier introduced next-generation versions of the CRJ700 and CRJ900 featuring operating cost improvements (e.g., up to 5.5% lower fuel consumption), an all-new cabin and increased use of composite materials. In June 2014, Bombardier delivered the frst of 30 CRJ900 NextGen aircraft to American Airlines Group. The aircraft will be operated by its PSA Airlines subsidiary under the American Eagle brand. The purchase agreement for the aircraft also included options for an additional 40 CRJ900 NextGens. Bombardier delivered 1,727 CRJs through 2013: 336 CRJ700/705s, 299 CRJ900s, 38 CRJ1000s, 33 Challenger 800 business jets and 1,021 earlier-model CRJs. Another 274 aircraft are projected to be built in 2014-23.

Primary competition comes from Embraer, although the Comac ARJ21, Sukhoi Superjet 100 and Mitsubishi Regional Jet may draw away potential CRJ customers in the future.

Bombardier CSeries Launched in July 2008, Bombardier’s CSeries family is the CS100 version, which carries 110 passengers, and the larger CS300 model, seating 135 in a standard confguration. The aircraft is powered by two Pratt & Whitney PW1500G geared turbofans producing up to 23,300 lb. thrust each. With an extra-capacity seating option, the CS300 can carry up to 160 passengers. CSeries service entry is slated for the second half of 2015. The CS100 will compete with the Embraer 190 and 195, while the CS300 will vie against the Boeing 737 and the Airbus A319. Some 162 CS100 and 331 CS300 aircraft are forecast for production in 2014-23.

Bombardier Q Series This twin-engine turboprop aircraft family initially was known as the Dash 8 series. The original Q100 made its frst fight in June 1983; frst deliveries followed in October 1984. The Q100 carried 37-39 passengers, and was equipped with 2,150-shp Pratt & Whitney Canada PW120/121 engines. Other models out of production are: the 37-39-passenger Q200 (with 2,150-shp PW123C/D engines) and 50-56-seat Q300 (with 2,500-shp PW123Bs). The 68-78 seat Q400 (with 5,071-shp PW150As) remains in production. Bombardier also offers a high-density, 86-seat confguration that converts the aircraft’s forward baggage door to a passenger exit and limits seat pitch to 29 in. Bombardier introduced the Q400 NextGen in 2009 and delivered the frst unit to Nok Air of Bangkok last August. At the 2014 Farnborough air show, Bombardier launched a new cargo-passenger combi version of the Q400. The combi Q400 NextGen aircraft is available in various confgurations, with the highest payload version capable of carrying up to 8,200 lb. of cargo and seating 50 passengers with a 32-in. pitch. Through March 2014, Bombardier and its corporate predecessors delivered 1,129 Q Series turboprops, including 458 Q400s, with an additional 319 forecast for 2014-23. The main competitor is the ATR series.

Cessna Caravan This single-turboprop-powered utility/passenger aircraft frst few in December 1982. Through 2013, Cessna produced 2,319 Caravans of all types. Designed with the small-package delivery segment in mind, Caravan models in production include the Caravan 675 and 208B Grand Caravan. Both are powered by a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-114A turboprop engine rated at 675 shp. Also in production is the upgraded Grand Caravan EX model, featuring a more powerful PT6A-140 turboprop engine. The EX achieved certifcation in January 2013.

Cessna is forecast to deliver 988 Caravans in 2014-23.

Comac ARJ21 Initially, the new ARJ21 regional jet from Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China (Comac) is to be available as the ARJ21-700 78-90-seater, while later introduction of the 98-105-seat ARJ21-900 is a possibility. Power is provided by two GE CF34-10A turbofans producing 18,500 lb. thrust each. Rollout of the frst ARJ21-700 occurred in December 2007, followed by frst fight in November 2008. Six ARJ21s were built through 2013, and 86 additional examples are forecast for production through 2023. The ARJ21 faces competition from Bombardier and Embraer.

68 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

Comac C919 A twin-turbofan, commercial passenger transport aircraft, the C919 targets the international duopoly in narrowbody airliner sales currently enjoyed by Airbus and Boeing. Variants include the baseline C919-200, which seats up to 168 passengers; the C919-100, a 130-seat model that will compete against the Airbus A319; and the C919-300, a larger 190-seat model designed to compete with Airbus’s A321 and Boeing’s 737-800/900.

Comac has selected the CFM International Leap-1C engine, with 30,000 lb. thrust, to power the C919. Service entry is planned for 2016. A total of 117 aircraft are forecast for production through 2023.

Daher-Socata TBM 850/900 The TBM 850 is a single-engine, 4-6-passenger, turboprop-powered aircraft that replaced the earlier TBM 700 in 2006. Power is provided by an 850-shp Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-66D engine. The aircraft has a range of 1,585 nm. Through 2013, production totaled 339 aircraft. Production of 13 units is forecast for 2014-23. The TBM 900 is an upgraded TBM 850 model introduced in March 2014. It features a new fve-blade propeller, winglets and tailcone. Daher-Socata also added a banana-shaped air intake, new exhaust stacks and carbon-fber cowlings to increase engine airfow circulation. Other improvements include an upgraded electrical system with a 300amp. starter generator and a 100-amp. standby alternator, reduced cabin noise, an automated pressurization system and seat upgrades. Maximum cruise speed has been increased by 10 kt. and range by 9%, while fuel consumption during cruise has been reduced to 37 gal.-hr. The TBM 900 can use the full power of the PT6A-66D engine on takeoff, eliminating the usage restrictions imposed on the TBM 850 and cutting takeoff roll to 2,380 from 2,840 ft. Deliveries began in March 2014. Some 433 TBM 900s are forecast for production through 2023.

Embraer 170/175/190/195 This is Embraer’s E-Jet family of twin-engine, 70-132-seat regional jetliners.

The 70-80 passenger 170 made its frst fight in February 2002, followed by the larger 78-88-seat 175 in June 2003. The 170 and the 175 share a common engine in the 14,200-lb.-thrust GE CF34-8E. The 94-114-seat 190 made its initial fight in March 2004, while the 106-122-passenger 195 frst few in December 2004. GE CF34-10E engines, rated 20,000 lb. thrust each, power these models. Additionally, Embraer developed the Lineage 1000, a business jet version of the 190; deliveries began in 2009. Through 2013, Embraer produced 189 170s, 189 175s, 503 190s, 129 195s and 19 Lineage 1000s. In June 2013, Embraer launched the second generation of its E-Jet family, dubbed the E2 series. The new E2 variants are the E175-E2, E190-E2 and E195-E2. Changes to the current E-Jet models include new wings, improved systems and Pratt & Whitney PW1700G engines on the E175-E2, and PW1900Gs on the E190-E2 and E195-E2. In addition, single-class capacity is increased on the E175-E2 and E195-E2. Service entry of the E190-E2 is planned for 2018, followed by the E195-E2 in 2019 and the E175-E2 in 2020. Some 971 aircraft, including the E2 models, are forecast for production in 2014-23.

Embraer ERJ 135/140/145 The ERJ 135/140/145 family is a series of twin-engine, 37-50-seat regional jets. The initial model was the 50-seat ERJ 145, which frst few in August 1995; deliveries began in late 1996. The next model was the 37-seat ERJ 135, which made its initial fight in July 1998, followed by deliveries in July 1999.

The 44-passenger ERJ 140 frst few in June 2000, with initial deliveries in July 2001. All models use variants of the Rolls-Royce AE 3007A series turbofan. Through 2013, 730 production ERJ 145s were built. In addition, 121 production ERJ 135s and 74 production ERJ 140s were manufactured.

GippsAero GA10/GA18 The Australian company GippsAero, which is a subsidiary of India’s Mahindra Aerospace, is developing a 10-seat, single-engine turboprop aircraft dubbed the GA10. The new aircraft is powered by a 450-shp Rolls-Royce 250-B17F engine. The GA10 has a maximum takeoff weight of 4,750 lb. First fight occurred in May 2012. Australian type certifcation and initial deliveries are planned for 2014. GippsAero is also developing an 18-seat twin-turboprop aircraft called the GA18. This aircraft is a reengineered version of the GAF N24 Nomad, production of which ended in the mid-1980s. GippsAero acquired the type certifcate for the Nomad in 2008. The GA18 likely will be powered by a pair of 450-shp Rolls-Royce 250 engines. According to GippsAero, the GA18 is expected to enter the general aviation market in 2015.

Harbin Y-12 The Y-12 series is a family of twin-turboprop aircraft. The Y-12-II is equipped with Western avionics and Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-27 engines fat-rated to 620 shp each. The Y-12-IV has winglets, a strengthened undercarriage and redesigned seating for 18-19 passengers. Another version is the Y-12E, which is powered by 750-shp PT6A-135 engines. A total of 58 Y-12-II/-IV and Y-12E aircraft are forecast to be produced for the civil market in the coming 10 years. Harbin is developing the Y-12F, which is substantially different from the earlier designs. The Y-12F has a wider fuselage, retractable landing gear, and increased speed, range and payload. It is equipped with 1,100-shp PT6A-65B engines and Honeywell Primus Apex avionics.

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 69

COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT UPDATE

Ilyushin IL-96 This four-engine, medium/long-range, widebody commercial passenger and cargo transport aircraft frst few as the Il-96-300 in 1988 and was awarded certifcation in December 1992. It is powered by Aviadvigatel PS-90A1 engines rated 35,275 lb. thrust each. The Il-96-400, a stretched version of the -300, is powered by uprated PS-90A1 engines. The Il-96-400 passenger version can carry 436 passengers in a single-class confguration, 386 in two classes or 315 in a three-class layout. Two Il-96-300 are forecast for production in 2014-23.

Irkut MS-21 The Irkut MS-21 is a twin-turbofan, narrowbody derivative of the defunct Yakovlev Yak-242 airliner.

The MS-21 family is the 150-seat MS-21-200, 181-seat MS-21-300 and 212-seat MS-21-400. All three are to be available in both basic and extended-range versions; the -200 is also to be available in a long-range variant. Power will be provided by Pratt & Whitney PW1400G or Aviadvigatel PD-14 engines. First fight is planned for 2015, with a service entry target date of 2017. Primary competition for the MS-21 is likely to come from the Boeing 737, Airbus A320 and Comac C919. A total of 252 MS-21s are forecast to be produced through 2023.

Mitsubishi Regional Jet Mitsubishi formally launched the twin-engine Mitsubishi Regional Jet (MRJ) family in March 2008; rollout was late last month. Initially, two basic models are planned: the 78-passenger MRJ70 and 92-passenger MRJ90. The MRJ70 is powered by 15,600-lb.-thrust Pratt & Whitney PW1215G engines, while the MRJ90 is powered by 17,600-lb.-thrust PW1217Gs. Extended- and long-range versions of each model are envisioned, while a 100-seater dubbed the MRJ100 is being considered. First fight is planned for the second quarter of 2015, with service entry slated for 2017. Some 343 MRJs are forecast for production through 2023.

Pilatus PC-12 This pressurized, single-turboprop-powered, corporate/utility transport aircraft frst few in May 1991, and received Swiss and U.S. certifcation in 1994. It has seating for nine passengers in its standard layout. Portugal’s OGMA assembles green aircraft and manufactures some components. The current PC-12 production version, the PC-12 NG (Next Generation), is powered by a 1,200-shp Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67P turboprop engine.

Some 1,231 PC-12s, including 443 PC-12 NGs, were built through 2013. Production of 846 units is expected in 2014-23. The PC-12 competes with the Daher-Socata TBM 850/900 and Cessna Caravan.

RUAG Aerospace Do 228 Next Generation Launched in 2007, RUAG Aerospace’s Do 228NG (Next Generation) is an updated version of Dornier’s original Do 228. The aircraft is powered by twin 776-shp Honeywell TPE331-10 engines, and features other improvements such as a new glass cockpit, fve-blade propellers and aerodynamic changes to the wing. The frst RUAG-produced Do 228NGs were delivered to customers in 2010, with eight aircraft delivered to date.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 The Sukhoi Superjet 100 is a family of twin-engine regional transports powered by Snecma/NPO Saturn SaM146 turbofan engines, rated at 13,500-17,500 lb. thrust each. The series was launched with a 95-98-seat baseline model, the Superjet 100-95. The shortened 100-75, a 75-78-seat version, and the lengthened 100-115/120, a 115-120-seat version, are being considered. The Superjet 100-95 made its frst fight in May 2008, and achieved initial Russian/Commonwealth of Independent States certifcation in early 2011. Deliveries began in mid-2011, with four fight-test aircraft and 33 production aircraft built through 2013. Production of 222 Superjet 100s is forecast for 2014-23.

Tupolev Tu-204/214 A twin-turbofan-powered, short/medium-range, narrowbody commercial transport aircraft, the Tu-204-100 is powered by Aviadvigatel PS-90A turbofans, while the Tu-204-120 variant has Rolls-Royce RB211535E4 engines. The Tu-214 has a higher maximum takeoff weight of 110,750 kg (243,600 lb.) than the Tu-204100. It retains the PS-90A powerplants of the -100 but carries additional fuel. The Tu-204’s frst fight occurred in January 1989 and, through 2013, 89 Tu-204s and Tu-214s were produced. Nine Tu-214 aircraft are forecast for production in 2014-23.

Viking Air DHC-6 Twin Otter Series 400 Viking Air owns the manufacturing rights to a number of out-ofproduction de Havilland aircraft, including the DHC-6 Twin Otter, an all-metal, non-pressurized, high-wing, twin-engine turboprop utility aircraft. In April 2007, Viking Air launched a program to restart production of the 19-passenger Twin Otter. The updated Viking Air Twin Otter Series 400 incorporates more than 800 changes to the Series 300, and is powered by two Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-34s or optional PT6A-35s. First fight occurred in February 2010, followed by Transport Canada certifcation in June 2010 and initial deliveries in July 2010. Production of 187 aircraft is forecast between 2014 and 2023. c

70 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING

To Place Your Classified Ad Contact: Diane Mason; Tel: 913-967-1736 Cell: 913-660-1530 diane.mason@penton.com

In Europe, Asia and Africa: Michael Elmes; + 44 (1255) 871070; e-mail: mike.elmes@aerospacemedia.co.uk; Fax: + 44 (1255) 871071 or David Harrison; +44 (0) 1689 837 447; e-mail: david@aerospacemedia.co.uk.

EQUIPMENT

ADVERTISING

Publisher / Sales Director

ULTRASONIC C-SCAN IMAGING SYSTEMS

Business & Commercial Aviation LV FXUUHQWO\ VHHNLQJ D 3XEOLVKHU 6DOHV 'LUHFWRU WR OHDG WKLV SUHVWLJLRXV EUDQG &RQWDFW )UDQN &UDYHQ DW IUDQN FUDYHQ#SHQWRQ FRP RU

t "VUPNBUFE 6MUSBTPOJD $ 4DBO 4ZTUFNT GPS 4JNQMF $PNQMFY (FPNFUSJFT t .VMUJ "YJT (BOUSJFT BOE *NNFSTJPO 5BOLT

(508) 351-3423

www.matec.com

www.AviationWeek.com

Aviation Weekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Recruitment Portfolio Provides Unparalleled Reach into the Largest, Most Dynamic Market in the World.

Build Your Recruitment Program Today!

To Learn More, Contact: Diane Mason Tel: 913-967-1736 Cell: 913-660-1530 diane.mason@penton.com

AviationWeek.com/awst

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3, 2014 71

CONTACT US

AVIATION WEEK & S PA C E T E C H N O L O G Y

ADVERTISING

SUBSCRIPTIONS & CUSTOMER SERVICE

SPECIAL PRODUCTS & SERVICES

President/Publisher: Gregory D. Hamilton; +1 (212) 204-4368; hamilton@aviationweek.com

Subscriber Service:

Conferences/Exhibitions

Managing Director, Civil: Iain Blackhall (U.K.); +44 (0)20 7152 4495; iain.blackhall@aviationweek.com.co.uk

U.S.: (800) 525-5003

www.aviationweek.com/events:

Outside the U.S.: +1 (847) 763-9147;

To Sponsor/Exhibit: Beth Eddy;

Fax: +1 (844) 609-4274

(561) 862-0005; betheddy@aviationexhibits.com

U.S. Sales Offices

Outside the U.S. Fax: +1 (847) 763-9682

Director, Business Development: Matt Holdreith; (646) 719-0767; matt.holdreith@aviationweek.com

Email: avwcustserv@halldata.com

Strategic Account Manager: Tom Davis; (469) 854-6717; tom.davis@aviationweek.com Strategic Account Manager: Tim Reed; (949) 650-5383; tim.r.reed@aviationweek.com Northeast U.S.: Chris Salem; (203) 791-8564; chris.salem@penton.com Southwest U.S.: Sean Fitzgerald; (202) 383-2417; sean.ftzgerald@aviationweek.com Northern Mid-West to Northwest U.S.: Leah Vickers; (949) 481-4519; leah.vickers@aviationweek.com Southern Mid-West to Southwest U.S.: Miguel Ornelas; (818) 834-4232; miguel.ornelas@penton.com Canada: Richard Brown; (416) 259-9631; r.brown@victorbrownmedia.com

International Regional Sales Offices Publisher, Defense, Space & Security: Andrea Rossi Prudente (U.K.): +44 (207) 176-6166; andrea.rossiprudente@aviationweek.co.uk Germany, Switzerland: Robert Rottmeier (Switzerland); +41 (21) 617-44-12; robert.rottmeier@aviationweek.co.uk

To Register: Alexander Zacharias; (646) 392-7883; alexander.zacharias@aviationweek.com

Subscription Inquiries: Address all inquiries and requests to Aviation Week & Space Technology, P.O. Box 1173, Skokie, IL 60076-8173. Include address label from recent issue when writing. Allow three to six weeks for address change. Include both old and new address and zip or postal codes.

AW&ST Mailing List Rental and Sales Zach Sherman; (212) 204-4347; zach.sherman@penton.com

Manage your Subscription (and claim Digital Edition) at: www.aviationweek.com/awstcustomers

Justin Lyman;

Register & claim access to AWST Online at:

justin.lyman@penton.com

(913) 967-1377;

www.aviationweek.com/awstregister

Digital Editions

Reprints, Photocopies and Permissions

Support Service: (888) 946-4666

Custom Reprints: Nick Iademarco;

Email: Support@zinio.com Web: www.zinio.com/help

niademarco@wrightsmedia.com Wright’s Media, 2407 Timberloch Place, Suite B

Subscribe at: www.aviationweek.com/awstdigitalsub

The Woodlands, Texas 77380

Order single copies at: www.aviationweek.com/awstdigitalsingle

Offce: (281) 419-5725 Toll Free: (877) 652-5295 Cell: (281) 853-5434 Fax: (281) 419-5712 www.wrightsmedia.com

Manage your Subscription (and claim Digital Edition) at: www.aviationweek.com/awstcustomers

Single Copy Sales Toll-free (U.S. only): (800) 525-5003 Outside the U.S.: +1 (847) 763-9147

Black and White Photocopies: Copyright Clearance Center; (978) 750-8400; www.copyright.com

Fax: +1 (844) 609-4274

Copying without the express permission of the Copyright

Subscription Information for other Aviation Week Products

Requests for other rights and permissions: Michael Stearns

Aviation Week Intelligence Network, MRO Prospector and Fleet Data:

Clearance Center or Penton Media is prohibited. at Aviation Week Permissions Department, stearns@aviationweek.com

France, Portugal, Spain, Benelux: Romaine Meyer (France); +33 (1) 40-75-2501; romaine.meyer@aviationweek.co.uk

(866) 857-0148 or outside the U.S.: +1 (847) 763-9147.

Fax: (844) 609-4274 or outside the U.S. +1 (847) 763-9682

Join the conversation! Follow us at:

Eastern Europe, India, Pakistan, Russia and the CIS, Middle East, Scandinavia, Africa, Mediterranean, Turkey and Asia Vittorio Rossi Prudente (Italy): +39 0 (49) 723548; prudente@aviationweek.co.uk

Web: www.aviationweek.com/awin

Facebook: www.facebook.com/AvWeek

Email: aw_intelligence@aviationweek.com

You Tube: www.youtube.com/AviationWeek

Business & Commercial Aviation: (800) 525-5003 or

Linked In: www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=2104198

Japan: Yoshinori Ikeda; +81 3 3661 6138; pbi2010@gol.com

+1 (847) 763-9147

Twitter: www.twitter.com/AviationWeek

Social Media

United Kingdom, Ireland: Michael Elmes, Aerospace Media (U.K.); +44 1206 321639; mike.elmes@aerospacemedia.co.uk

For more information visit us online at

Israel: Tamir Eshel, Eshel Dramit Ltd. (Israel); +972 (9) 8911792; eshel_tamir@yahoo.com

www.aviationweek.com/awst

Business/Production Group Production Manager: Carey Sweeten; (913) 967-1823; carey.sweeten@penton.com

Aviation Week & Space Technology

Production Coordinator: Donna Brown; (913) 967-7203; donna.brown@penton.com

1166 Avenue of Americas, New York, N.Y. 10036

Production Coordinator: Kara Walby; (913) 967-7476; kara.walby@penton.com

November 3/10, 2014 VOL. 176, NO. 39 (ISSN 0005-2175)

Member of Audit Bureau of Circulations and Magazine Publishers of America. Published weekly, except for one less

Advertising/Marketing Services

issue in January, February, April, May, August, November and December by Penton Media Inc., 9800 Metcalf Ave,

For Media Kits, Promotions or Custom Media: www.aviationweek.com/mediakits or Elizabeth Sisk; (860) 245-5632; elizabeth.sisk@aviationweek.com

Canada Post International Publications Mail Product Sales Agreement No. 40026880. Registered for GST as

Advertising Operations Manager: Casey Carlson; (610) 373-2099; casey.carlson@aviationweek.com

Overland Park, KS 66212-2216. Periodicals postage paid at Shawnee Mission, KS, and additional mailing offces.

Penton Media, GST # R126431964. Title reg. ® in U.S. Patent Offce. Copyright © 2014 by Penton Media. All rights reserved. All rights to these names are reserved by Penton Media. Postmaster: Send address changes to Aviation Week & Space Technology, Attention: Subscription Services, P.O. Box 5724, Harlan, IA 51593-1224

72 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/awst

Aerospace Calendar Register for Aviation Week events at www.aviationweek.com/events or by calling +1 (646) 392-7883 Upcoming Event

November 4-6, 2014 Singapore

This is where airlines, MROs, buyers, suppliers, OEMs, regulators, supply-chain and industry experts converge to define the aviation maintenance industry.

Get Your Free Pass for Asia’s MUST Attend MRO Event!

Register today and secure your place! http://aviationweek.com/mroa14 Future Events Nov. 19-20—A&D Programs, Litchfield Park, Arizona.

Jan. 13-14—MRO Latin America, Buenos Aires.

Feb. 2-3—MRO Middle East, Dubai.

March 5—Laureate Awards, Washington.

April 14-16—MRO Americas, Miami.

To submit Aerospace Calendar Listings Call +1 (703) 997-0227

e-mail: kyla.clark@aviationweek.com Nov. 11-16—Eighth China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition. Zhuhai.

See www.airshow.com.cn Nov. 12-14—11th ALTA Airline Leaders Forum. Nassau, Bahamas.

See www.alta.aero/2010 Nov. 18—SpeedNews 12th Aerospace and Defense Industry Suppliers Conference.

Litchfield Park, Arizona. See speednews.com/aerospace-and-defenseindustry-suppliers-conference Dec. 8-10—Middle East Business Aviation.

Dubai. See www.meba.aero Feb. 1-3—Routes Americas. Denver. See www.routesonline.com/events/172/ routes-americas-2015/ Feb. 3-6—National Business Aviation Association Schedulers and Dispatchers Conference. San Jose, California. See www.nbaa.org/events/sdc/2015 Feb. 12-13—Air Force Association Air Warfare Symposium and Technology Exposition. Rosen Shingle Creek. Orlando, Florida. See www.afa.org/AirWarfare/ airwarfaresymposium Feb. 16-20—Bangalore Airshow. Begumpet Airport, Hyderabad, India. See www.india-aviation.in/ Feb. 22-26—IDEX. Abu Dhabi National Exhibition Center. See www.idexuae.ae/ Feb. 24-March 1—Australian International Airshow and Aerospace & Defense Exposition Avalon 2015. See www.airshow.com.au/airshow2015/index.asp Feb. 25—ATW Airline Industry Achievement Awards. Omni Shoreham Hotel. Washington. atwonline.com/atwairline-industry-achievement-awards

ADVERTISERS IN THIS ISSUE Airbus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7 Airbus Helicopters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Aviage Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Aviation Week Events MRO Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 BASF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Boeing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Breitling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55, 4th Cover Custom Control Sensors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 GE Aviation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Combat Aircraft Guide . . . . . . 3rd Cover JEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Ontic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 PPG. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Pratt & Whitney . . . . . . . . . . . . 2nd Cover PTI Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 AviationWeek.com/awst

Rockwell Collins. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Russian Helicopters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 United Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Wesco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 MRO Edition (between pages 38 & 39) Aero Instruments & Avionics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MRO19 AgustaWestland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO17 Aircraft Demolition . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO24 Aviation Week Events MRO Latin America . . . . . . . . MRO43 AJ Walter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO20 BAE Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO55 Boeing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO21, 27-30 Bombardier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO9 CFM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MRO2

Chromalloy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO33 Dyncorp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO35 Exxon Mobil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MRO6-7 Harco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO40 Henkel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO25 Hydro Systems KG . . . . . . . MRO12, 13, 14 Iberia Airlines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO23 Ipsen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO37 Jamaica Bearings Group . . . . . . . MRO26 Lufthansa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MRO5 MTU Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO56 Northrop Grumman . . . . . . . . . . . .MRO41 Schaefer Tech. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO39 TAP Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MRO11 CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING . . . . . . 71 Matec . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014 73

CHRIS SIMUNDSEN/AW&ST

Editorial

Commercial Space Still the Way to Go

74 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/NOVEMBER 3/10, 2014

“

The Antares failure is a setback for a commercial space company, not a setback for commercial space writ large.

“

B

low up a rocket bound for the International Space Station in spectacular fashion on the East Coast of the U.S., as Orbital Sciences Corp. did on Oct. 28 (see page 26), and you can be sure it will be noticed. Just as with a high-profile airplane crash, the amateur analysts were out in force with misunderstandings about the technologies and shoot-from-the-hip theories about what went wrong and the impact the accident will have.

Lessons will be learned from the failure of Orbital’s Antares at NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. What exactly all those lessons are, it is way too early to tell. The accident investigation has only just begun. However, it is not too early to lay out some lessons that should not be drawn and to point out a broader concern that this mishap does highlight.

One conclusion that should not be drawn is that commercial space companies are simply less capable than the legacy aerospace giants. Nor should it be inferred that spaceflight is so staggeringly difcult only a large government-run enterprise can achieve a high level of performance. First of all, Orbital has already used Antares to fly its Cygnus vehicle to the space station three times. Competitor Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) has used its Dragon spacecraft to deliver cargo to the station successfully four times.

The Antares accident does not show that NASA opted for a risky strategy by relying on commercial providers for space station resupply missions. The truth is quite the opposite. With two commercial suppliers, NASA can shift missions to SpaceX, if Antares is grounded for a prolonged period. The failure was a setback for a commercial space company, but it was not a setback for commercial space writ large. No one was hurt. No critical space station payload was lost.

Thankfully, so far, NASA leadership does not seem inclined to retreat from the commercial path it has charted. Several weeks ago, the agency awarded the first contracts (to SpaceX and Boeing) for spacecraft to carry astronauts—the first for NASA to be developed under the new approach in which broad performance parameters are set and contractors are free to apply their creativity and ingenuity in the design of this “commercial crew vehicle” (AW&ST Sept. 22, p. 24). And the agency recently requested proposals for the next phase of space station resupply services. Don’t be surprised, though, if some politicians trying to protect parochial interests argue that the commercial approach is fraught with programmatic peril.

Where the armchair engineers were onto something last week was in questioning Antares’s reliance on modified 1960s Russian engines. There is nothing wrong in principle with using AJ-26s, as Aerojet calls the Kuznetsov Design Bureau NK-33s it modified.

Still, it is a commentary on the sad state of American rocket propulsion that Orbital found no competitive indigenously developed powerplant for the first stage when it designed Antares. Orbital had begun looking for a replacement engine before the accident, but the leading contender is also Russian, the RD-193. The U.S.’s neglect of launch propulsion technology was punctuated the day

after the Antares accident when a United Launch Alliance Atlas V flew with a Global Positioning System satellite from Cape Canaveral. That vehicle, too, uses Russian engines: RD-180s.

All this is certainly not the fault of “New Space” entrepreneurs. On the contrary, companies like SpaceX and Jef Bezos’s Blue Origin, have been spending their own money to advance rocket propulsion. If U.S. capabilities have atrophied, the blame rests squarely on government for not investing sufficiently in research and development, as we have noted on this page (May 26/June 2, p. 74).

Spaceflight is difcult—today. It is expensive— today. And the level of risk remains high—today.

But it need not remain so forever. We must resist the idea that space is inherently difcult, expensive and risky. Aviation once seemed so, too. Today, aviation is efcient and safe. Space can get there—if we accept that it can improve and realize that it will require hard work, investment and experimentation. And we must acknowledge that true progress is always punctuated by failure.

There is no progress without failure.

Ex-NASA astronaut Leroy Chiao put it well. Writing for CNN, he said: “Without a doubt, critics will arise and question why we are entrusting cargo deliveries and future crew exchanges to commercial companies. The answer is simple: It is the logical evolution of technology and commercialization, following the same path as the development of the airplane and commercial air transportation. . . . This mishap is painful, but it is only a speed bump on the way to the commercialization of spaceflight.”

So let us progress. Getting to the point where spaceflight is much less risky and much less expensive requires new approaches such as those being pioneered by commercial space companies. Government can do its part by investing more in the research and development of space technologies. c AviationWeek.com/awst

Your Comprehensive Guide to Combat Aircraft Researched and compiled by Aviation Week’s team of defense experts, your quick guide to crucial, in-depth details about combat aircraft around the globe.

Aviation Week’s Guide to Combat Aircraft profles the fourteen most prominent fghters and bombers around the globe today.

Order today and receive: f A detailed discussion of the aircraft’s features, including major differences among all of its variants, going back to the start of each program. The profles go on to elaborate on current and future upgrade initiatives. f A complete production and delivery history, specifying how many of each aircraft have been sold to each customer and when deliveries of the aircraft occurred. f A specification table, broken down by variant, which lists dimensions, weights, performance, weapons, avionics and unit costs.

The fourteen aircraft profiled include: f f f f f f f f f f f f f f

F-15 Eagle and Strike Eagle F-16 Fighting Falcon F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet EA-18 Growler F-22 Raptor F-35 Lightning II / Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) A-10 Thunderbolt II Eurofghter Typhoon Dassault Rafale JAS 39 Gripen Su-27/30/33/35 Flanker and Su-34 Fullback B-52 Stratofortress B-1 Lancer B-2 Spirit

Simple Solutions for Connecting a Complex Industry

Download Your Copy Today!

Convenient PDF format. Single copies available for just $249; multiple copies can be purchased at discounted rates. To download yours today, go to:

AviationWeek.com/ aviation-week-guide-combat-aircraft For more information, call: Toll-free (N. America): 1-800-262-1954 Outside N. America: +1-913-967-1719

FIND AVIATION WEEK

November 19-20, 2014 $!ĆŤ %#3 )ĆŤÄ&#x2018;ĆŤ %0 $ßƍ!( ĆŤ .'Ä&#x152;ĆŤ .%6+*

,,(5%*#ĆŤ .! %/%+*ĆŤ0+ĆŤ .+#. )ĆŤ 0. 0!#5Ä&#x152;ĆŤ ( **%*#Ä&#x152;ĆŤ 4! 10%+*

+%*ĆŤ !.+/, !ĆŤ * ĆŤ !"!*/!ĆŤ,.+#. )ĆŤ(! !./ĆŤ * ĆŤ%* 1/0.5ĆŤ!4,!.0/ĆŤ0+ĆŤ!2 (1 0!ĆŤ,.+#. )ĆŤ ,!."+.) * !Ä&#x2039; Learn best practices in tackling efciency, cost, strategy, and supply chain integration. Speakers will address next-generation engineering tools and processes, the future of aircraft design, updated defense acquisition priorities, and the race to space â&#x20AC;&#x201D; on a budget.

This two-day symposium will provide: Ä&#x2018;ĆŤ 1..!*0ĆŤ * (5/%/ĆŤ+"ĆŤ !"!*/!ÄĽ/, !ĆŤ) .'!0ĆŤ!*2%.+*)!*0Ä&#x2039;

PRODUCED BY

CHARTER SPONSOR

Ä&#x2018;ĆŤ 1% * !ĆŤ0+ĆŤ +), *%!/ĆŤ /ĆŤ0$!5ĆŤ,.!, .!ĆŤ0+ĆŤ!4! 10!ÄĽ/1,,(5ĆŤ 0+ĆŤ)!!0ĆŤ"101.!ĆŤ/, !ÄĽ !"!*/!ĆŤ,.+#. )ĆŤ.!-1%.!)!*0/Ä&#x2039; Ä&#x2018;ĆŤ !//+*/ĆŤ(! .*! ĆŤ * ĆŤ !/0ĆŤnext practices to improve overall !"!*/!ÄĽ/, !ĆŤ,.+#. )ĆŤ,!."+.) * !Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR

SPONSORS

!#%/0!.ĆŤ*+3ĆŤ 0ĆŤ 333Ä&#x2039; 2% 0%+*3!!'Ä&#x2039; +)ÄĽ!2!*0/ÄĽ ,

ÄĄ ĆŤ WITH

,!! !3/ĆŤÄ Ä&#x201A;0$ĆŤ **1 ( Aerospace & Defense Industry Suppliers Conference +2!) !.ĆŤÄ Ä&#x2030;Ä&#x152;ĆŤÄ&#x201A;Ä&#x20AC;Ä Ä&#x2026;ĆŤÄ&#x2018;ĆŤ $!ĆŤ %#3 )ĆŤ

%0 $ßƍ!( ĆŤ .'Ä&#x152;ĆŤ .%6+*

PROGRAM EXCELLENCE SPONSORS

ADDED VALUE SPONSORS

MEDIA PARTNERS

Developed by and for aerospace and defense !*#%*!!.%*#Ä&#x152;Æ«/0. 0!#5Æ« * Æ«/1,,(5Æ« $ %*Æ« !4! 10%2!/Æ« * Æ«,.+#. )Æ«(! !./Ä&#x152;Æ« Ä&#x2019; Æ« .+#. )/Æ« !2 (1 0!/Æ«,.+#. )Æ«,!."+.) * !Æ« * Æ«$%#$(%#$0/Æ« 0$!Æ«/0.!*#0$/Æ« * Æ«3! '*!//!/Æ«+"Æ« 1..!*0Æ«,.+#. )Æ« ,!."+.) * !Ä&#x2039;Æ« .+)Æ« -1%/%0%+*Æ«/0. 0!#%!/Æ« * Æ« "+.! /0/Æ«0+Æ« !(%2!.%*#Æ«%**+2 0%+*Æ« * Æ«.!-1%.! Æ« 0! $*+(+#5Ä&#x152;Æ«0$%/Æ«/5),+/%1)Æ«,.+2% !/Æ«0 0% /Ä&#x152;Æ« (!//+*/Ä&#x152;Æ«'*+3(! #!Æ« * Æ«*!40Æ« !/0Æ«,. 0% !/Æ«5+1Æ« *Æ«,10Æ«0+Æ«3+.'Æ«%))! % 0!(5Ä&#x2039;Æ« Ä&#x2019; Æ« .+#. )/Æ« "+/0!./Æ«*!03+.'%*#Æ« * Æ«.!( 0%+*/$%,Ä¡ 1%( %*#Æ« * Æ« ,.+2% !/Æ« Æ«,( 0"+.)Æ«"+.Æ«%* 1/0.5Æ«0$+1#$0Æ«(! !./Æ« * Æ«%**+2 0+./Æ«0+Æ« +)!Æ«0+#!0$!.Æ« * Æ« %/ 1//Æ«0$!Æ« 1..!*0Æ«/0 0!Æ« * Æ«,( *Æ«"+.Æ«0$!Æ«"101.!Ä&#x2039; Tap here to register today for the only event of its kind with focus on: Ä&#x2018;Æ« *#%*!!.%*#Æ«Ä&#x2019;Æ« **+2 0%+* Ä&#x2018;Æ« 0. 0!#5Æ«Ä&#x2019;Æ« +.! /0 Ä&#x2018;Æ« .+#. )Æ« !."+.) * !

! .*Æ«/1 !//"1(Æ«/0. 0!#%!/Æ«"+.Æ«!þ Æ«Æ« %!* 5Ä&#x152;Æ«%**+2 0%+*Æ« * Æ«,.+üƫ0 %(%05Æ«".+)Æ«0$!Æ« %* 1/0.5Ä&#x161;/Æ«(! %*#Æ«!4,!.0/Ä&#x2039;

Jennifer Byrne, VP Engineering & Technology, Lockheed Martin !.+* 10% /Æ« +Ä&#x2039;

5.+*Æ« (( *Ä&#x152;Æ« %.! 0+.Ä&#x152;Æ« ,%0 (Æ« (,$ Æ« .0*!./

Alan F. Estevez, Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics

$.%/0+,$!.Æ« !.* * !6Ä&#x152;Æ« VP Advanced Systems, +.0$.+,Æ« .1)) *Æ« Aerospace Systems

Lisa Kohl, Sector VP (+ (Æ« 1,,(5Æ« $ %*Ä&#x152;Æ« +.0$.+,Æ« .1)) *Æ« Aerospace Systems

Wes Kremer, VP Air & Missile Defense Systems, Raytheon Missile Systems

Mike Madsen, President, +*!53!((Æ« !"!*/!Æ«Ä&#x2019;Æ« Space

Nan Mattai, SVP Engineering & Technology, + '3!((Æ« +((%*/

Alexander Nakahara, Systems Engineer, +.0$.+,Æ« .1)) *Æ« +.,Ä&#x2039;

2% Æ« *Æ« 1.!*Ä&#x152;Æ« +.,Ä&#x2039;Æ« Sr. Vice President Business Strategy,

Ä¡Ä&#x192;Æ« +))1*% 0%+*/

+Æ«(! .*Æ«)+.!Æ« +10Æ« ((Æ«+"Æ«0$!Æ«/,! '!./Æ« 0Æ« Ä&#x2019; Æ« .+#. )/Ä&#x152;Æ«2%/%0Æ«333Ä&#x2039; 2% 0%+*3!!'Ä&#x2039; +)Ä¥!2!*0/Ä¥ ,

November 19-20, 2014 %#3 )Æ« !/+.0Æ«Ä&#x2018;Æ« %0 $üƫ!( Æ« .'Ä&#x152;Æ«

CONFERENCE AGENDA November 18, 2014 7:15 a.m.7:00 p.m.

,!! !3/Ä&#x161;ĆŤ !.+/, !ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ !"!*/!ĆŤ * 1/0.5ĆŤ 1,,(%!./ĆŤ +*"!.!* !ĆŤSeparate registration required.

November 19, 2014 7:303:00 p.m.

!#%/0. 0%+*ĆŤÄŁĆŤWigwam Foyer

7:308:30 a.m.

.! '" /0ĆŤÄŁĆŤMohave Ballroom Sponsored by AlixPartners

((ĆŤ +*"!.!* !ĆŤ/!//%+*/ĆŤ3%((ĆŤ0 '!ĆŤ,( !ĆŤ%*ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ %#3 )ĆŤ ((.++)ĆŤ1*(!//ĆŤ +0$!.3%/!ĆŤ%* % 0! Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ 8:30 a.m.

!( +)!

Greg Hamilton, President, Aviation Week

ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ Sponsored by Deloitte, LLP 8:40 a.m.

%2+0/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ .%+.%0%!/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ .+#. )/

The U.S. Defense Department continues to seek balance between cost and investment, between dominance and good-enough, and between defending against non-government threats and world powers.

Moderator: Tom Captain, Vice Chairman, Deloitte, LLP Alan F. Estevez Principal Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics 9:15 a.m.

+3ĆŤÄ?ĆŤ $ 0ĆŤ % ĆŤ +1ĆŤ 1/0ĆŤ ! .Ä&#x2022;

Our panel of analysis experts returns again this year to provide their perspectives on strategy, innovation, in-side thinking and Wall Street.

Byron Callan, Director, Capital Alpha Partners Pierre Chao, Managing Director/Co-Founder, Renaissance Strategic Advisors Steven Grundman, George Lund Fellow, Atlantic Council Kenneth J. Krieg, former Undersecretary of Defense/AT&L and Founder, Samford Global 10:15 a.m.

.! 'ĆŤÄŁĆŤWigwam Foyer

10:30 a.m.

.! 0%*#ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ * 1/0.% (ĆŤ /!ĆŤ+"ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ 101.!

Members of the A&D community responsible for identifying and sourcing the materials, services, and components of the future increasingly are using data analytics to assess the health of the supply chain/value stream â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and get an early read on supplier quality, performance and risk.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;This event was extremely stimulating and covered â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;toughâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; areas that you wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t ďŹ nd covered anywhere else. The amount of commonality across the industry was striking.â&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Michelle Munk, Technology Development Mgr., NASA-Langley

Dana Hullinger, Director Supply Chain Strategy, Intelligence & Analytics, Boeing Defense Space & Security Lisa Kohl, Sector VP Global Supply Chain, Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems Patrick Sunderlin, Supply Chain Council, Lockheed Martin 11:30 a.m.

Ä&#x2019; Ä&#x161;/ĆŤ 101.!ĆŤ ! !./ĆŤ ,! 'ĆŤ 10

Aerospace and defense leaders across the industry are carefully balancing the need to cut costs and the need to preserve opportunities for todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s young professionals. After hearing from our industry experts and leaders, this session will provide the perspectives of four young professionals â&#x20AC;&#x201D; where they see opportunity, challenges ...and concerns.

ĆŤÄ&#x201A;Ä&#x20AC;Ä Ä&#x192;ĆŤ

Michael Bruno, Sr. Business/Supply Chain Editor, Aviation Week Dustin Martin, Systems Engineer, Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp.

Alexander Nakahara, Systems Engineer, Northrop Grumman Corp.

Jason Taylor, Supply Chain Management, Boeing Defense Space & Security 12:15 p.m.

1* $ĆŤÄŁĆŤMohave Ballroom Sponsored by AZ Commerce Authority

!#%/0!.ĆŤ*+3Ä&#x201C;ĆŤ333Ä&#x2039; 2% 0%+*3!!'Ä&#x2039; +)ÄĽ!2!*0/ÄĽ ,

ƍ ƍSponsored by Dassault Systèmes 1:30 p.m.

!40ĆŤ . 0% !/Ä?ĆŤ !5+* ĆŤ +),(% * !ĆŤÄŁĆŤ ĆŤ #%(%05

Earned Value Management has never been associated with agility or speed, but in this session weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll see how industry program managers are using EVM as a strategic tool, to include leading indicators and early visibility to guide industry investment.

Moderator: Dan Rice, VP Technical Operations, Lockheed Martin Information Systems & Global Solutions.

Colin Dorsett, Director - Orion Program, Honeywell Space Systems Brad Shaw, PM Phantom Eye, Boeing Phantom Works Ken Hunt, Deputy PM, J-2X Engine Program, Aerojet Rocketdyne Tori Wenger, Principal Program Manager 757/767 Large Display System product line, Rockwell Collins 2:15 p.m.

!40ĆŤ . 0% !/Ä?ĆŤ *0!#. 0%*#ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ 1,,(5ĆŤ $ %*ĆŤ !) %*/ĆŤ +,ĆŤ $ ((!*#!ĆŤ"+.ĆŤ /

Program executives from across the industry agree on one thing â&#x20AC;&#x201D; integrating the supply chain into the daily rhythm of the program and its eforts to cut and avoid costs remains one of the top three issues.

Three program leaders, recognized as part of the Aviation Week Program Excellence Awards initiative, will share what they are doing to make this a foundational capability, not an issue.

Program Excellence Preview: Whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s In/ Whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Out in Program Management.

Tap to listen

Moderator: Rob Kolosieke, Director Programs, Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems Steve Parker, VP Cargo Helicopters, Boeing Defense, Space & Security Gary Kushner, PM, Interface Region imaging Spectrograph (IRIS), Lockheed Martin Larry Thimmesch, VP 525 Program, Bell Helicopter 3:00 p.m. * ĆŤ+"ĆŤ 5 6:15 p.m.

.+#. )ĆŤ 4 !((!* !ĆŤ ! !,0%+*ĆŤÄŁĆŤSachem West

7:00 p.m.

.+#. )ƍ 4 !((!* !ƍ *-1!0ƍģƍSachem East Sponsored by Dassault Systèmes

November 20, 2014 All conference sessions will take place in the Wigwam Ballroom unless otherwise indicated.

8:00- !#%/0. 0%+*ĆŤÄŁĆŤWigwam Foyer 3:00 p.m.

8:00- .! '" /0ĆŤÄŁĆŤMohave Ballroom 8:30 a.m. Sponsored by AlixPartners 8:30 a.m.

!( +)!

Joseph C. Anselmo, Editor-in-Chief, Aviation Week & Space Technology ĆŤ ĆŤ 8:40 a.m.

0. 0!#%!/ĆŤ"+.ĆŤ ! (%*#ĆŤ3%0$ĆŤ %2+0/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ +3*01.*/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ ! $*+(+#% (ĆŤ $ ((!*#!/

Leaders from space and defense/security operations will provide their perspectives on what the coming 24 months will bring, from meeting new demand signals to preserving investment in the future.

David Koopersmith, VP/GM Vertical Lift Programs, Boeing Defense Space & Security Mike Madsen, President, Honeywell Defense & Space Jim Stameson, President and CEO, Plasma Ruggedized David Van Buren, Corp. Sr. Vice President-Business Strategy, L-3 Communications 9:20 a.m.

$.! 0ƍ //!//)!*0ƍ * ƍ %//%(!ƍ Ýƍ!*/!ļ !"!*/!

Technology and program requirements for the space and defense sectors rest on the threat and opportunity assessment. As we begin our program updates, weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ll look ďŹ rst at what the Defense Department is establishing as threat priorities.

Tom Karako, Visiting Fellow, Center for Strategic and International Studies Wes Kremer, VP Air & Missile Defense Systems, Raytheon MIssile Systems

November 19-20, 2014 %#3 )ĆŤ !/+.0ĆŤÄ&#x2018;ĆŤ %0 $ßƍ!( ĆŤ .'Ä&#x152;ĆŤ

ĆŤ ĆŤ

Ä?ĆŤ ,%*%+*Ä?ĆŤ Defense Companies ! //!//ĆŤ +.0"+(%+/ĆŤ %*ĆŤ %#$0ĆŤ+"ĆŤ (+ (ĆŤ $ *#!

Tap to Learn More.

10:00 a.m. Break 10:15 a.m.

Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s All About Connections

A decade ago all the buzz was about network centric capabilities.

Today, the focus is on creating connectivity between assets, from space to ground, with game changers such as Facebook and Google in the mix. This session will look at the key connectivity challenges and what these will mean to every program.

Moderator: Amy Butler, Sr. Pentagon Editor, Aviation Week & Space Technology Paul DeLia, Chief Technology OfďŹ cer, L-3 Communications Jay Grove, VP Communications Division, Northrop Grumman Information Systems 11:00 a.m.

!40ĆŤ !*!. 0%+*ĆŤ %. . "0

Just when everyone sensed there was a lull in new aircraft platforms, a wellspring of opportunity is developing â&#x20AC;&#x201D; and industry is responding in ways designed to play on everyoneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strengths.

Christopher Hernandez, VP Advanced Systems, Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems Stephen Justice, Dir Advanced Program Pursuits, Lockheed Martin Advanced Development Programs/Skunk Works Jeff Wieringa, VP Engineering and Technology, Phantom Works, Boeing Defense Space & Security 11:45 a.m.

$!ĆŤ !ĆŤ%/ĆŤ *

While the dollars may be limited from a NASA perspective, the entirety of the space race took on new meaning in March and April as companies around the globe began setting in place strategies to secure their position in the commercial satellite, defense, and civil space arenas. Among the boldest moves was the merger of Orbital Sciences and ATK, designed to provide a new mode of propulsion to Orbital from an internal resource, and a business that widened the aperture of opportunity for both companies.

David Thompson, CEO, Orbital Sciences 12:30 p.m.

1* $ĆŤÄŁĆŤMohave Ballroom

ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ 1:30 p.m.

/!ĆŤ 01 5Ä?ĆŤ 1 *01)ĆŤ +),10%*#ĆŤ * ĆŤ **+2 0%+*

Thereâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s no quick shift from todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s computing power to quantum computing and where its capabilities allow scientists and engineers to shift their focus. Lockheed Martin has invested in quantum computing capabilities at University of Southern California and is bringing forth the lessons learned in terms of processes and practices that afect design, development and collaboration.

Moderator: David H. Riemer, VP A&D Strategy, Siemens PLM Jennifer Byrne, VP, Corporate Engineering & Technology, Aeronautics, Lockheed Martin Kati Schmidt, Technical Operations Group Engineer, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. Greg Tallant, Fellow for Quantum Computing, Lockheed Martin Corp.

2:15 p.m.

*#%*!!.%*#ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ 101.!

Based on the lessons learned by Lockheed Martin in quantum computing, as well as additional innovations from materials to software, engineering leaders look to the future and why todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s digital tool set and processes need a major overhaul to enable the age of supercomputing, advanced materials and advanced manufacturing.

Nan Mattai, SVP Engineering & Technology, Rockwell Collins Daryl Pelc, VP Engineering & Product Support, Global Services & Support, Boeing Defense Space & Security Peter Smith, VP Engineering, United Technologies Aerospace Systems Randy Robertson, Corporate Fellow, Honeywell Inc.

ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤÄĄĆŤ **+2 0%+*ĆŤ * ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ 0$ĆŤ0+ĆŤ Success for Aerospace & Defense Companies

3:00 p.m. +*"!.!* !ĆŤ * /

!#%/0!.ĆŤ*+3Ä&#x201C;ĆŤ333Ä&#x2039; 2% 0%+*3!!'Ä&#x2039; +)ÄĽ!2!*0/ÄĽ ,

ĆŤ Ä? $!ĆŤÄ&#x201A;Ä&#x20AC;Ä Ä&#x2026;ĆŤ 2% 0%+*ĆŤ !!'ĆŤ .+#. )ĆŤ 4 !((!* !ĆŤ 3 . /ĆŤ .%*#ĆŤ0+#!0$!.ĆŤ ,.+#. )ĆŤ!4! 10%2!/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ0$!%.ĆŤ 1/0+)!.ĆŤ counterparts, and leaders from .+//ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ%* 1/0.5ĆŤ%*ĆŤ ĆŤ# ( ĆŤ!2!*0ĆŤ !/%#*! ĆŤ0+ĆŤ.! +#*%6!ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ !/0ĆŤ%*ĆŤ ,!."+.) * !ĆŤ * ĆŤ(! !./$%,Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ %* (%/0/ĆŤ * ĆŤ3%**!./ĆŤ3%((ĆŤ !ĆŤ % !*0%ßƍ! ĆŤ%*ĆŤ/!2!*ĆŤ 0!#+.%!/ĆŤ0$ 0ĆŤ .!ýƍ! 0ĆŤ/5/0!)ĆŤ * ĆŤ/1 ÄĄ/5/0!)ĆŤ (!2!(ĆŤ,.+#. )/ĆŤ 0ĆŤ ((ĆŤ,$ /!/ĆŤ+"ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ (%"! 5 (!Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ $%/ĆŤ5! .Ä&#x161;/ĆŤ*+)%*!!/ĆŤ3%((ĆŤ /$ .!ĆŤ(!//+*/ĆŤ(! .*! ĆŤ0$.+1#$+10ĆŤ 0$!ĆŤ +*"!.!* !Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ Sneak-Peek: What to expect from the ďŹ nalists and next practice honorees for the 2014 Aviation Week Program Excellence Awards.

Tap to listen

!/!.2!ĆŤ5+1.ĆŤ/, !ĆŤ 0ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ .+#. )ĆŤ 4 !((!* !ĆŤ 3 . /ĆŤ + '0 %(ĆŤ Reception and Banquet on $1./ 5Ä&#x152;ĆŤ +2!) !.ĆŤÄ&#x201A;Ä&#x20AC;ĆŤ0+ƍßƍ* ĆŤ +10ĆŤ3$+ĆŤ .!ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ3%**!./Ä&#x201C;

,!! !3/ĆŤÄ Ä&#x201A;0$ĆŤ **1 (

Aerospace & Defense Industry Suppliers Conference +2!) !.ĆŤÄ Ä&#x2030;Ä&#x152;ĆŤÄ&#x201A;Ä&#x20AC;Ä Ä&#x2026;ĆŤÄ&#x2018;ĆŤ $!ĆŤ %#3 )ĆŤ

%0 $ßƍ!( ĆŤ .'Ä&#x152;ĆŤ .%6+* +.ĆŤ0$!ƍßƍ./0ĆŤ0%)!ĆŤ Ä&#x2019; ĆŤ .+#. )/ĆŤ%/ĆŤ +ÄĄ(+ 0! ĆŤ3%0$ĆŤ ,!! !3/Ä&#x161;ĆŤ !.+/, !ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ !"!*/!ĆŤ * 1/0.5ĆŤ 1,,(%!./ĆŤ Conference. $%/ĆŤ +*"!.!* !ĆŤ%/ĆŤ !/%#*! ĆŤ0+ĆŤ/!.2!ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ"1((ĆŤ. *#!ĆŤ +"ĆŤ, .0% %, *0/ĆŤ%*ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ 5* )% ĆŤ#(+ (ĆŤ !.+/, !ĆŤ Ä&#x2019;ĆŤ !"!*/!ĆŤ) .'!0Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ $!ĆŤ #!* ĆŤ%* (1 !/ĆŤ0+,% /ĆŤ+"ĆŤ interest for equipment manufacturers, business and +.,+. 0!ĆŤ !2!(+,)!*0ĆŤ!4! 10%2!/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ) .'!0ĆŤ * (5/0/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ * ĆŤ%*2!/0)!*0ĆŤ *'!./Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ

,! '!./ĆŤ3%((ĆŤ .!//ĆŤ ĆŤ .+ ĆŤ. *#!ĆŤ+"ĆŤ%),+.0 *0ĆŤ 0+,% /ĆŤ%* (1 %*#ĆŤ)%(%0 .5ĆŤ %. . "0ĆŤ,.+#. )ĆŤ1, 0!/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ /,! %ßƍ ĆŤ) .'!0ĆŤ"+.! /0/Ä&#x152;ĆŤ Ä&#x2019; ĆŤ0.!* /ĆŤ * ĆŤ .%2!./Ä&#x152;ĆŤ * ĆŤ%* 1/0.5ĆŤ+,,+.01*%0%!/Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ "ĆŤ5+1ĆŤ ! (ĆŤ3%0$ĆŤ0$!ĆŤ !.+/, !ĆŤ * ĆŤ !"!*/!ĆŤ%* 1/0.5Ä&#x152;ĆŤ0$%/ĆŤ +*"!.!* !ĆŤ%/ĆŤ #! .! ĆŤ"+.ĆŤ5+1Ä&#x2039;ĆŤĆŤ Register for A&D Programs and the A&D Defense Industry Suppliers conference and save on special combo packages!

November 19-20, 2014 %#3 )ĆŤ !/+.0ĆŤÄ&#x2018;ĆŤ %0 $ßƍ!( ĆŤ .'Ä&#x152;ĆŤ

ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ 333Ä&#x2039; 2% 0%+*3!!'Ä&#x2039; +)ÄĽ!2!*0/ÄĽ ,ĆŤ Phone: + 1.646.392.7883 Email: events@aviationweek.com

ĆŤ

ĆŤ

ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ ĆŤĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ 300 East Wigwam Blvd.

LitchďŹ eld Park, Arizona 85340 wigwamarizona.com Phone: +1.623.935.3811 A block of rooms has been reserved The Wigwam. The room rate for this group is: $179. Overnight accommodations should be arranged separately by delegates. Reservations should be made directly with the hotel.

Phone: +1.800.327.0396 Email: wigwamreservations@wigwamarizona.com.

Please make sure you mention Aviation Week to receive the room block rate. Space is limited so please make sure you book your rooms soon! ĆŤ ĆŤ +*0 0ĆŤ + ** ĆŤ ,!! ĆŤ Phone: + 1.424.456.6501 Email: jspeed@speednews.com 0 * . ĆŤ 0!ĆŤ"+.ĆŤ Ä&#x2019; ĆŤ .+#. )/

$995

.+#. )ĆŤ 4 !((!* !ĆŤ 3 . /ĆŤ + '0 %(ĆŤ ! !,0%+*ĆŤ & Dinner

$175

Ä&#x2019; ĆŤ +) +ĆŤ, ' #!ĆŤĆŤ A&D Programs is co-located with SpeedNewsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Aerospace & Defense Industry Suppliers Conference. 00!* ĆŤ +0$ĆŤ * ĆŤ/ 2!Ä&#x201C;

$1565

â&#x20AC;&#x153;An amazing collection of industry talent and leadership to learn from and share best practices.â&#x20AC;? ÄŁĆŤ (%Ýƍƍ 0+*!Ä&#x152;ĆŤ Ä Ä&#x192;Ä&#x2020;ĆŤ Program Director, Pratt & Whitney

ľƍ +2!.*)!*0ÄĽ %(%0 .5Ä?ĆŤ ,! % (ĆŤ. 0!/ĆŤ ,,(5ĆŤ0+ĆŤ 0%2!Ä&#x152;ĆŤ#1 . Ä&#x152;ĆŤ * ĆŤ.!/!.2!ĆŤ military and civil service personnel. Industry or retired personnel not included. Please contact Alex Zacharias for details at Phone: + 1.646.392.7883 Email: alexander.zacharias@aviationweek.com * !(( 0%+*ĆŤ * ĆŤ .! %0ĆŤ . ĆŤ 10$+.%6 0%+*ĆŤ +(% 5ĆŤ * !(( 0%+*/ĆŤ)1/0ĆŤ !ĆŤ received in writing via email (events@aviationweek.com) or fax +1.212.478.3334 no later than Friday, September 19, to receive a refund less a processing fee of ĸÄ&#x192;Ä&#x20AC;Ä&#x20AC;ƍĨ/0 * . ĆŤ.!#%/0. 0%+*ÄŠÄ&#x152;ĆŤÄ¸Ä Ä&#x20AC;Ä&#x20AC;ƍĨ %(%0 .5ÄĽ +2!.*)!*0ÄŠÄ&#x152;ĆŤ+.ƍĸÄ&#x2020;Ä&#x20AC;ƍĨ .+#. )ĆŤ 4 !((!* !ĆŤ 3 . /ĆŤ + '0 %(ĆŤ ! !,0%+*ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ %**!.ĆŤ+*(5ÄŠÄ&#x2039;ĆŤ +ĆŤ.!"1* /ĆŤ3%((ĆŤ !ĆŤ#%2!*ĆŤ for no-shows or cancellations received after September 19, 2014, but a substitute may be sent and any fees not paid by original registrant will be applied to /1 /0%010!Ä&#x161;/ĆŤ"!!/Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ ĆŤ

ĆŤ ĆŤ ĆŤ Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ .%2 5ĆŤ *"+.) 0%+* Aviation Week values your Privacy. To opt out, review your data or if you have any questions about our privacy practices, please contact Aviation Weekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Privacy Ofcial at 1166 Avenue of the Americas, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10036 or at laurie.becker@aviationweek.com. Your information is stored in a secure database located in the United States and access is limited to authorized persons.

!#%/0!.ĆŤ*+3Ä&#x201C;ĆŤ333Ä&#x2039; 2% 0%+*3!!'Ä&#x2039; +)ÄĽ!2!*0/ÄĽ ,

November 19-20, 2014 $!ĆŤ %#3 )ĆŤÄ&#x2018;ĆŤ %0 $ßƍ!( ĆŤ .'Ä&#x152;ĆŤ

,,(5%*#ĆŤ .! %/%+*ĆŤ0+ĆŤ .+#. )ĆŤ 0. 0!#5Ä&#x152;ĆŤ ( **%*#Ä&#x152;ĆŤ 4! 10%+* %* ĆŤ+10ĆŤ3$ 0ĆŤ/!-1!/0. 0%+*ĆŤ * ĆŤ /,!* %*#ĆŤ 10/ĆŤ)! *ĆŤ0+ĆŤ,.+#. )ĆŤ ) * #!)!*0ĆŤ * ĆŤ,!."+.) * !Ä&#x2039;ĆŤ

! .*ĆŤ3$ 0ĆŤ/, !ĆŤ * ĆŤ !"!*/!ĆŤ(! !./ĆŤ .!ĆŤ +%*#ĆŤ0+ĆŤ //1.!ĆŤ,.+#. )ĆŤ/1 !//Ä&#x2039; Featuring .+#. )ĆŤ 4 !((!* !ĆŤ 3 . /ĆŤĆŤ

!#%/0!.ĆŤ 0 333Ä&#x2039; 2% 0%+*3!!'Ä&#x2039; +)ÄĽ!2!*0/ÄĽ , +.ĆŤ ((ĆŤ + ** ĆŤ ,!! ĆŤ 0ĆŤÄ Ä&#x2039;Ä&#x2026;Ä&#x201A;Ä&#x2026;Ä&#x2039;Ä&#x2026;Ä&#x2021;Ä&#x2020;Ä&#x2039;Ä&#x2021;Ä&#x2020;Ä&#x20AC;Ä +ÄĄ(+ 0! ĆŤ3%0$ĆŤ ,!! !3/Ä&#x161;ĆŤ !.+/, !ĆŤÄ&#x2019;ĆŤ !"!*/!ĆŤ * 1/0.5ĆŤ 1,,(%!./ĆŤ +*"!.!* !Ä&#x2039; Looking to establish thought-leadership in front of this audience?

Call today to ďŹ nd out about sponsorship opportunities.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Excellent discussion on very relevant topics.â&#x20AC;? â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Scott Norr, Deputy Director, Lockheed Martin Ä&#x2019; ÄĄ %/

AN ICON JUST GOT LARGER

THE NEW NAVITIMER 46 mm