Lbell911

FAA Safety Order for Bombardier Jets

By DAN CATERINICCHIA,
AP
Posted: 2007-08-29 14:40:01
WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. and Canadian aviation regulators have ordered Bombardier Inc. to address wing malfunctions on certain jets flown by regional carriers such as Air Wisconsin and SkyWest Inc.

Air Wisconsin operates flights for US Airways Group Inc., while SkyWest is a feeder airline for UAL Corp.'s United, Delta Air Lines Inc. and Midwest Air Group Inc.'s Midwest Airlines.

The Federal Aviation Administration's directive, which goes into effect Sept. 5, covers 684 airplanes in the U.S. fleet that were built by Montreal-based Bombardier.

The airplanes have experienced so-called flap failures over several years, according to Transport Canada, which issued its own safety order affecting 87 jets last month.

"Flap failure may result in a significant increase in required landing distances and higher fuel consumption than planned during a diversion," according to the FAA order.

The FAA requires a revision of the airplane flight manual to address flap failures, training for the new operations, and mandates cleaning and maintenance of the affected shafts.

The Canadian order includes additional training and maintenance directives, and the company has until Friday to comply with its basic requirements, Transport Canada spokeswoman Lucy Vignola said Wednesday.

Representatives from Bombardier did not immediately return calls for comment.

An FAA spokeswoman said while the flap problems are potentially unsafe, there was no immediate danger, which is why the company was given between 30 and 120 days from the effective date to make the required changes.

The affected Bombardier regional jets hold roughly 50 people. The company's main competition in this niche is Brazil's Embraer.

Also Wednesday, Bombardier canceled planned job cuts and said it may recall some workers after deciding to boost production following better-than-expected results in the second quarter.

flyandive

How is this news now? I thought this had been a problem for a while. As in it's why we are supposed to operate the flaps incrementaly during flight.

HSLD

The directive institutionalizes operating procedures an high lites a potential design defect. I wonder if this directive will be enforced in China?

Here are a few paragraphs from the AD:

1. Flap Extended Diversion

Upon arrival at the destination airport, an approach shall not
be commenced, nor shall the flaps be extended beyond the 0 degree
position, unless one of the following conditions exists:
a. When conducting a precision approach, the reported visibility
(or RVR) is confirmed to be at or above the visibility associated
with the landing minima for the approach in use, and can be
reasonably expected to remain at or above this visibility until
after landing; or
b. When conducting a non-precision approach, the reported
ceiling and visibility (or RVR) are confirmed to be at or above the
ceiling and visibility associated with the landing minima for the
approach in use, and can be reasonably expected to remain at or
above this ceiling and visibility until after landing; or
c. An emergency or abnormal situation occurs that requires
landing at the nearest suitable airport; or

[[Page 46558]]

d. The fuel remaining is sufficient to conduct the approach,
execute a missed approach, divert to a suitable airport with the
flaps extended to the landing position, conduct an approach at the
airport and land with 1000 lb (454 kg) of fuel remaining.

Note 1: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM TR/165) shall be
applied to the normal fuel consumption for calculation of the flaps
extended missed approach, climb, diversion and approach fuel
consumption.


Note 2: Terrain and weather must allow a minimum flight altitude
not exceeding 15,000 feet along the diversion route.


Note 3: For the purpose of this AD, a ``suitable airport'' is an
airport that has at least one usable runway, served by an instrument
approach if operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), and the
airport is equipped as per the applicable regulations and standards
for marking and lighting. The existing and forecast weather for this
airport shall be at or above landing minima for the approach in use.

2. Flap Failure After Takeoff

When a takeoff alternate is filed, terrain and weather must
allow a minimum flight altitude not exceeding 15,000 feet along the
diversion route to that alternate, or other suitable airport. The
fuel at departure shall be sufficient to divert to the takeoff
alternate or other suitable airport with the flaps extended to the
takeoff position, conduct and approach and land with 1000 lb (454
kg) of fuel remaining.

Note: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM TR/165) shall be applied
to the normal fuel consumption for calculation of the flaps
extended, climb, diversion and approach fuel consumption.

3. Flap Zero Landing

Operations where all useable runways at the destination and
alternate airports are forecast to be wet or contaminated (as
defined in the AFM) are prohibited during the cold weather season
(December to March inclusive in the northern hemisphere) unless one
of the following conditions exists:
a. The flap actuators have been verified serviceable in
accordance with Part C (Low Temperature Torque Test of the Flap
Actuators) of SB 601R-27-150, July 12, 2007, or
b. The flight is conducted at a cruise altitude where the SAT is
-60 deg C or warmer. If the SAT in flight is colder than -60 deg C,
descent to warmer air shall be initiated within 10 minutes, or
c. The Landing Distance Available on a useable runway at the
destination airport is at least equal to the actual landing distance
required for flaps zero. This distance shall be based on Bombardier
performance data, and shall take into account forecast weather and
anticipated runway conditions, or
d. The Landing Distance Available on a useable runway at the
filed alternate airport, or other suitable airport is at least equal
to the actual landing distance for flaps zero. This distance shall
be based on Bombardier performance data, and shall take into account
forecast weather and anticipated runway conditions.

Note 1: If the forecast destination weather is less than 200
feet above DH or MDA, or less than 1 mile (1500 meters) above the
authorized landing visibility (or equivalent RVR), as applied to the
usable runway at the destination airport, condition 3.a., 3.b., or
3.d. above must be satisfied.


Note 2: When conducting No Alternate IFR (NAIFR) operations,
condition 3.a., 3.b., or 3.c. above must be satisfied.''

flyandive

Ah, I get it now. Anybody know when the flap failures started to happen? Was it as the fleet aged or was it a known problem when it was certified?

rickair7777

From day one. That's why the flaps 8,20 speed is 215 instead of the the 230 shown on the ASI. They also replaced a component in the drive mechanism.

But it still happens...I had one last month.

The 700/900 don't seem to have flap problems, but the slats fail occasionally (at least they did at mesa). This is not so big a deal as flaps stuck at 30 or 45 on a GA/missed.

CL65driver

I remember the CRJ having some problem with flap twist as well... not sure if anyone else did this, but didn't AWAC have some deal where they had to put flaps at 8 for the walk around to check for flap damage?....

ExperimentalAB

I believe the CRJ operators that didn't comply with some provision of an AD or what-have-you had to keep flaps 8 on the ground...something I heard from somebody who heard from somebody else - but it definately has something to do with complying with some form of mx. AWAC was not the only operator to do that - Mesa did as well, and...? Other's as well.

FlyerJosh

I remember that in the 2001-2002 timeframe ACA had a bunch of flap issues and we had to leave flaps set at 8 on the taxi in. They did some MX modification to the jackscrew assembly and some other flap drive components and it significantly reduced the number of flap faults/fails. We also didn't have to leave the flaps down after landing.

wolf

My understanding was that operators who used the 230 kias flaps 8/20 speed as opposed to 215 were not permitted to retract the flaps after landing until a post flight had been accomplished. Just what I heard.