CAA » IMS International LLP Blog | IMS International LLP Blog

Internal Audits-Aerospace Scheme

Dec 152012

It has recently been brought to the attention of IMS that there are concerns within the aerospace industry regarding organisations internal audits, especially taking into account organisations certified to AS9100, AS9120 and AS9110.

There are various points within the Aerospace Scheme standards that refer to ensuring the Management System takes into account customer and regulatory requirements (4.1-The organisation’s quality management system shall also address customer and applicable statutory and regulatory quality management system requirements) is an example. This implies that when applying the management system requirements the organisation needs to include customer and regulatory requirements.

One of the concerns being identified is that the internal audit plans and processes are not identifying applicable customer and regulatory requirements and being audited accordingly. Many organisations are performing their internal audits against the Aerospace Standard clauses but not considering the other standards which may be applicable to them. As an example, the internal audits should review compliance with customer specifications which may be referenced within contracts. This could also include CAA, EASA and FAA requirements etc. The “note” within the internal audit clause states “Planned arrangements include customer contractual requirements” when making reference to the internal audit plans.

With this in mind, IMS Auditors will be reviewing internal audit plans in greater detail to ensure that customer, regulatory and statutory requirements have been planned and audited sufficiently. Auditors will need to see that the Audit Plan/Schedule covers all requirements and the internal audit records cover the above.

FAA Approves Production of Boeing 787 Dreamliner

AS9100, News No Responses »

Aug 272011

Its many years behind schedule and Millions of Dollars over budget but it looks like the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is finally about to take off. The Dreamliner is approximately 50% composite which is relatively new technology when applied to the aerospace industry and probably a large factor in the delays to the aircraft.

I wonder if Boeing get in trouble for late deliveries as I know their suppliers get in trouble?

At an event at Boeing’s facility in Everett, Washington, Administrator Babbitt presented Boeing executives with two certificates for the design and production of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner with Rolls-Royce engines.

“Today’s achievement could not have been possible without the professionalism and dedication of the FAA team involved in the certification,” said Administrator Babbitt. “The engineers, inspectors and flight test pilots all worked diligently to ensure our high safety standards were met.”

Boeing made its initial application to the FAA on March 28, 2003 and the program was launched in April 2004. The first 787 rollout ceremony was on July 8, 2007 at Boeing’s Everett assembly factory. The airplane first flew on Dec. 15, 2009, and the six flight test airplanes have since accumulated more than 4,645 flight hours, with approximately 25 percent of those hours flown by FAA flight test crews. More than 200,000 hours were logged by FAA technical experts who were involved in the type certification of the 787.

The airplane will use 20 percent less fuel and produce less noise compared to similarly sized airplanes. It was designed and manufactured by suppliers and partners around the world and integrated at final assembly. The 787 incorporates many capabilities of the nation’s Next Generation Air Transportation System, or NextGen.

The European Safety Agency (EASA) also issued a same day validation of the FAA Type Certificate of the 787.

EASA Issues Type Certificate for Boeing 787 Dreamliner

AS9100, News No Responses »

Aug 262011

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) issued on Friday 26 August 2011 to Boeing a Type Certificate for the Boeing 787-8 aircraft. This EASA certificate recognises that Boeing has demonstrated compliance to the EASA Type Certification Basis with applicable airworthiness and environmental requirements.

When handing over EASA type-certificate to Boeing, Patrick Goudou, EASA Executive Director said: “This is a great achievement. I am particularly proud of the dedication and efficiency demonstrated by EASA certification teams in dealing with new certification challenges such as the use of composite material which account for more than 50% of the aircraft’s primary structure”.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and EASA worked closely together during the certification of the aircraft, the FAA being the primary authority for all American designs, and EASA the validating authority. Boeing received the FAA Type Certificate simultaneously at a joint ceremony organised Friday in Seattle.

Type certification is a prerequisite to the first delivery to airline customers. The Boeing 787-8 has now completed all certification requirements prior to its entry into service later this year with the Japanese Airline All Nippon Airways (ANA). The first European airline to operate the Boeing 787-8 will be Poland’s national carrier LOT with the first delivery expected in March 2012.

The Boeing 787-8 can carry between 210 and 250 passengers over a distance of 7,650-8,200 nautical miles (14,200-15,200 km). Its in-service record will now be monitored through continuing airworthiness activities.

Above information is courtesy of EASA.

CAA announce policy change for orphan aircraft

AS9100 No Responses »

May 122011

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has introduced a change to the policy regarding ‘orphan’ aircraft. An aircraft becomes known as an orphan when the type is no longer supported by a Type Certificate Holder, usually the manufacturer and the State of Design.

Previously, this meant the orphan would only be eligible for a Certificate of Airworthiness (CofA ) through a Type Responsibility Agreement (TRA) which required the owner to monitor and react to continuing airworthiness concerns with the fleet. However, it effectively meant that if one aircraft owner decided to establish a TRA, all affected aircraft were compelled to also continue to hold a CofA. In most cases this went against the wishes of the majority of the aircraft owners, who would be content for their aircraft to hold a Permit to Fly. The policy change will now allow non-EASA orphans to either transfer to a Permit to Fly or remain on a Certificate of Airworthiness.

The CAA said the change of policy will result in fleets of aircraft of the same type having mixed certification, with some on a CofA and others a PtoF, but it allows the decision for the appropriate airworthiness certificate and the application of the corresponding operating limitations to rest with individual aircraft owners.

The CAA has now written to all current TRA holders informing them of the policy change. Any aircraft owner who wants to take advantage of the new policy should notify the TRA organisation of the deletion of the individual aircraft from the TRA and to apply to the CAA Applications and Approvals Department for the initial issue of a PtoF. The CAA will then confirm with the TRA holder when an individual aircraft has been transferred to a PtoF.

BBC News; Continental ‘responsible’ for Concorde Crash

AS9100, News No Responses »

Dec 062010

The below information is taken from the BBC website:

A Paris court has said Continental Airlines was “criminally responsible” for the crash of a Concorde supersonic jet 10 years ago, and fined it 200,000 euros (£170,000).

It has also been ordered to pay 1m euros to the jet’s operator Air France.

A Continental mechanic, John Taylor, was given a 15-month suspended prison sentence over the crash.

Continental has said it will appeal, saying the verdict is “absurd” and “only protects French interests”.

Another airline operative, Stanley Ford, and three French officials were cleared.

The Concorde caught fire shortly after take-off from Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris in July 2000, killing 113 people.

The court ruled that the crash was caused by a piece of metal left on the runway after falling from a Continental jet. Investigators said this caused a tyre-burst in the Concorde, which in turn ruptured a fuel tank.

The judge in the case confirmed investigators’ findings that titanium debris dropped by a Continental DC-10 onto the runway at Charles de Gaulle airport before the Concorde took off was to blame.

Mr Taylor should not have used titanium parts to make repairs on the DC-10 because the metal was known to be too dangerous for aeroplane tyres, and he should have used a softer metal, aluminium, instead, the court found.

Continental had disputed this interpretation, saying the airliner, operated by Air France, was already in flames before it hit the small piece of titanium.

“While we agree with the court’s decision that Stanley Ford was innocent of the charges he faced and we share his relief that his decade-long nightmare is over, we strongly disagree with the court’s verdict regarding Continental Airlines and John Taylor and will of course appeal this absurd finding,” a UK-based Continental spokesman said in a statement.

“Portraying the metal strip as the cause of the accident, and Continental and one of its employees as the sole guilty parties, shows the determination of the French authorities to shift attention and blame away from Air France, which was government-owned at the time and operated and maintained the aircraft, as well as from the French authorities responsible for the Concorde’s airworthiness and safety.”

Compensation

Financial claims were not the trial’s focus, but apportioning blame was, says the BBC’s Christian Fraser in Paris.

However, the court ruled that Continental should pay 70% of any compensation claims to the families of victims. Aerospace group EADS was asked to pay the remaining 30%.

Following Monday’s verdict, Air France, which paid out 100m euros in compensation, may decide to seek to reclaim some of that money from Continental.

There is a separate court case taking place over economic compensation for the crash.

Most of the passengers were German tourists heading to New York to join a luxury cruise to the Caribbean. Nine French crew members and four hotel workers also died.

EWIS and EZAP

AS9100, Legislation No Responses »

Jun 222010

EWIS is short for Electrical Wiring Interconnection Systems and was introduced in September 2008 by European Aviation Safety Agency and the Federal Aviation Administration and requires holders of Type Certificates for large aircraft (CS-25-Certification Specifications for Large Aeroplane). An entirely new Subpart (Subpart H) has been added to CS-25.

The addition requires existing TC Holders to develop EWIS Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) derived from the Enhanced Zonal Analysis Procedure (EZAP) is imposed through the provisions of Part 21A.3B©1 for existing TCs, 21A.21©(3) for applicants for TC and 21A.103(a)(2)(iii) for applicants for changes to TC. All TC holders should have been notified of the applicability of those provisions through a dedicated letter in October 2008. FAR 26 has been introduced in the USA as the equivalent system requirement.

The applicant must conduct analyses if the STC requires a revision of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) applicable to Electrical Wiring Interconnection System (EWIS) as defined below that include the following:

Maintenance and inspection requirements for the EWIS developed with the use of an Enhanced Zonal Analysis Procedure (EZAP) that includes:

a. Identification of each zone of the aeroplane.

b. Identification of each zone that contains EWIS.

c. Identification of each zone containing EWIS that also contains combustible materials.

d. Identification of each zone in which EWIS is in close proximity to both primary and back-up hydraulic, mechanical, or electrical flight controls and lines.

e. Identification of:

• Tasks, and the intervals for performing those tasks, that will reduce the likelihood of ignition sources and accumulation of combustible material, and

• Procedures, and the intervals for performing those procedures, that will effectively clean the EWIS components of combustible material if there is not an effective task to reduce the likelihood of combustible material accumulation.

f. Instructions for protections and caution information that will minimize contamination and accidental damage to EWIS, as applicable, during the performance of maintenance, alteration, or repairs.

The ICA must be in the form of a document appropriate for the information to be provided, and they must be easily recognizable as EWIS ICA.

Enhanced Zonal Analysis Procedures (EZAP)

Zonal Inspection is a collective term comprising selected Visual Inspections and Visual Checks that are applied to each zone, defined by access and area, to check system and power plant installations and structure for security and general condition.

Levels of inspection applicable to EWIS.

Detailed Inspection (DET).

An intensive examination of a specific item, installation or assembly to detect damage, failure or irregularity. Available lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as mirrors, magnifying lenses or other means may be necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate access procedures may be required.

General Visual Inspection (GVI).

A visual examination of an interior or exterior area, installation or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure or irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to enhance visual access to all exposed surfaces in the inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight or droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or doors. Stands, ladders or platforms may be required to gain proximity to the area being checked.

EWIS inspections may apply to the following components and systems:

(1) Wires and cables.

(2) Bus bars.

(3) The termination point on electrical devices, including those on relays, interrupters, switches, contactors, terminal blocks, and circuit breakers and other circuit protection devices.

(4) Connectors, including feed-through connectors.

(5) Connector accessories.

(6) Electrical grounding and bonding devices and their associated connections.

(7) Electrical splices.

(8) Materials used to provide additional protection for wires, including wire insulation, wire sleeving, and conduits that have electrical termination for the purpose of bonding.

(9) Shields or braids.

(10) Clamps and other devices used to route and support the wire bundle.

(11) Cable tie devices.

(12) Labels or other means of identification.

(13) Pressure seals.

(b) The definition in subparagraph (a) of this paragraph covers EWIS components inside shelves, panels, racks, junction boxes, distribution panels, and back-planes of equipment racks, including, but not limited to, circuit board back-planes, wire integration units and external wiring of equipment.

(c) Except for the equipment indicated in subparagraph (b) of this paragraph, EWIS components inside the following equipment, and the external connectors that are part of that equipment, are excluded from the definition in subparagraph (a) of this paragraph:

(1) Electrical equipment or avionics that is qualified to environmental conditions and testing procedures when those conditions and procedures are :

(i) Appropriate for the intended function and operating environment, and

(ii) Acceptable to the Agency.

(2) Portable electrical devices that are not part of the type design of the aeroplane. This includes personal entertainment devices and laptop computers.

(3) Fibre optics.

Changes to the U.S Federal Regulations Regarding Export Certificates of Airworthiness

AS9100, Legislation No Responses »

Jun 042010

As of the 14th April 2010 Aircraft Engines and Propellers previously exported to the UK under FAA Form 8130-4, Export Certificate of Airworthiness will now need to be exported under FAA Form 8130-3, Authorized Release Certificate.

Complete aircraft will continue to be exported under FAA Form 8140-4.

The FAA revised Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 1, 21 and 45.

See the FAA, CAA and EASA websites for further details.

March 2013
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Jan
				1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9	10
11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18	19	20	21	22	23	24
25	26	27	28	29	30	31