For Don Hudson

[Mitch Cronin]

Hi Don....

As you well know, the AEF is what it's members make it to be (along with it's hosts, of course).

The last post I saw from you, or the last thread anyway... you'd asked "what's happened to the AEF?"

I can tell you..... YOU, and a bunch of other good folks stopped posting, that's what's happened!

We're all still here Don... say hello once in a while, will you?

Cheers,

Mitch

[Maverick]

I think the format has a few of the old regulars (and me) somewhat miffed but I was heartened to see a "Dark side of low-cost" thread again. That tells me that all is well!!

[Maverick]

AND I'M TIRED OF BEING A NEWBIE, DAMNIT!!!

[W5]

Ten more Posts and you are a Member again!

[Don Hudson]

Hi Mitch...okay, okay, okay, awready.

Over the past two months or so the Flight Data Analysis program at AC has been undergoing significant developments and changes which, along with regular line flying duties, have been demanding all my attention and time. Also, I try to give myself a break from the industry's problems. They're beyond anyone's ability to solve here and the work on FDA has some real rewards and consequences, so its where I spend my time now.

The nature of the forum has changed and there are a lot of new posters, so the nature of the discourse has also changed. I'm watching the dialogue on lo-cost, on the future of AC, (which some opinions seem so rabidly anti-AC and some so badly misinformed that I find it difficult to stay and read..in fact, I don't anymore), on the future of the industry and most importantly, the future of the airline piloting profession which is of great concern given the harsh anti-labour forces currently at work in the political-economy.

Mitch, you'd be fascinated by the FDA Program's ability to troubleshoot aircraft systems. Notwithstanding the primary flight safety benefits, since over 1600 parameters are digitally recorded on the AC Airbus fleet, ACTS troubleshooting of say, high pack outlet temperatures, airframe vibration, accelerometer functionality and any parameter which would obviate a gear-swing for examples, FDA is of tremendous technical and commercial value to AC and to ACTS.

The data request always goes first through the Association FDA Gatekeeper so that the pilots know their data is confidential, protected and secure, but the working relationship with ACTS is developing very nicely.

At the same time, we're working on Event Sets like unstable approaches, go-around handling and performance, TCAS events, GPWS events, rotation techniques (for tail-strike prevention) and so on, so the FDA workload is significant right now.

For others on the forum new to this technology, I welcome questions, not on specifics at AC because that's proprietary but on flight data analysis programs, concerns, techniques, relationship to management, TC, pilots' associations etc. I know that almost all other airlines in Canada are at varying stages of FDA development...some with full programs underway to those considering start-up of the program, (they're going to have to sooner or later).

Anyway, that's where I've been.

Good to see you here carrying the flag!

Don

[dozerboy]

Don,

When I read all the crap thrown on this forum, you are breath of fresh air. Don for Prime Minister.

Dozerboy

[Don Hudson]

Dozerboy;

Re "Don for Prime Minister"...

I'd probably be "assassinated" in the first week if I did what I think should be done, but assuming I had the chance I'd immediately resign and hand the country over to ordinary people and get rid of the special interests which hold the entire public and private agenda in Canada, (AND the US). Would it be a mess? You bet. But it would be OUR mess. In the meantime, democracy has, like just about every other social institution in this country and our neighbour to the south, been "privatized" and is now beyond public inspection or control.

And don't get me going on the latest US client-state, Iraq and "self-government" there. The entire matter is a study in oxymoronic statments for which BushII is a Grand Master.

Anyone who believes or claims these days that the US "just wanted to rid the world of a crazy dictator" and "bring" democracy to this independant country first needs a saliva test and then a course in media crap-detecting. (That such courses are not made available in high school is a singularly fascinating comment on our "education" system, but that is an entirely new discussion).

I posted that opinion (about US hegemony) more than a year ago when the raging, irrationalities of pre-war propaganda were being almost universally spun and spit out of a credulous media. The outcome which is the present disaster is as obvious as it is morally and legally unconscionable. If the tables were turned and our beloved country were invaded by (supply name here) and our people were killed, slaughtered enmasse or starved of food or medicine, what would we have to say and what would we be tempted to do?

I fear we will have our answer sooner than we desire.

Don

[Mitch Cronin]

Thanks for the response Don... I really didn't think you'd stay away for good.

I agree with you re. the apparent nature of the discourse here. I think the format change made some newcomers feel more comfortable at the same time as some of the long-timers felt somewhat less comfortable. As well, I think the mechanics of this format - the movement to the top of any thread containing a new post - appears to hi-light some of the more contentious issues and bickering that has always gone on. It used to happen somewhat further down the page as a thread aged.

However, as people become more familiar and get more comfortable with this new format, I think that overall nature of the discourse will return to something more palatable. The heightened anxieties caused by severe situational - beyond our control events also surely plays a role in attitudes and emotions expressed in here.

you'd be fascinated by the FDA Program's ability to troubleshoot aircraft systems. Notwithstanding the primary flight safety benefits, since over 1600 parameters are digitally recorded on the AC Airbus fleet, ACTS troubleshooting of say, high pack outlet temperatures, airframe vibration, accelerometer functionality and any parameter which would obviate a gear-swing for examples, FDA is of tremendous technical and commercial value to AC and to ACTS.

I'd love to see examples sometime! Information of that magnitude could indeed be invaluable. I wonder how access to that info could be handled for those attempting the trouble-shooting?... Perhaps it'll wind up being somewhat centrally controlled by people in MOC, and they'll wind up issuing a request to change some component with no details as to why they've zeroed in on that particular component? The end result would be the required fix, but the education for the guys on the floor may have been missed.

It's been interesting to see how different airlines - and individuals - approach efforts to rectify some of the more troublesome snags... Some believe in methodical methods that allow for certain knowledge to be gained of the precise causes and eventual fixes... others focus solely on the result being the fix, regardless of whether they learn anything in the process. I've seen multiple components thrown at a snag, leaving no one any wiser as to the cause, after the snag is cleared. That's sometimes appeared to make sense for the immediate needs, but it's expensive, and doesn't help for future events. Too often, it's been the MEL expiry date, along with allowing the time to pass in the first place, that's created the need for the non-educational fix.

But I obviously don't have all the info regarding various costs etc... My perspective is one of a man who likes to methodically work out the details of what's wrong and tackle it with logic. Heaven, for guys like me, is having all the time in the world to trouble shoot and test the results. Clearly that's not always the best thing for an airline that needs their airplane. It can certainly pay off down the road though, as we learn from past experiences.

Anyway, it's great to hear we're still carrying on with improving our future performance... Sometimes it seems in troubled times these things get axed while the focus is on the now... while the future is left to fend for itself.

Glad to see you carrying that flag.

Cheers,

Mitch

[Don Hudson]

Mitch;

re "Heaven, for guys like me, is having all the time in the world to trouble shoot and test the results. Clearly that's not always the best thing for an airline that needs their airplane."

That's precisely where FDA can help. A few weeks ago, the AME's tackled a troublesome hydraulic overtemp snag. The FDA data was provided through the Gatekeeper's authorization and the Data Analysis guys retrieved the data from the airplane's card. The AME's traced the snag's genesis and targeted some parts and test flew the airplane for the results on the card. Some chronic snags now have the potential for quick solutions.

That's the procedure which can save enormous quantities of time and money and get the airplane back into service quickly.

Regarding control of the process, its a sticky issue. The data always has to go through the ACPA Gatekeepers first. However, as the process matures and protocols and procedures are worked out over time and education takes place, there will be more freedom to independantly access certain restricted areas of the data which do not have flight operations impacts or considerations.

You can see the problems of such access, even at that level of course. What if the airplane had a flap overspeed and there was no log entry? What if the airplane was being flown inappropriately? What then? They have the knowledge and, ethically, must do something about it. This is a problem for the industry, not just AC. So its stuff like that that has to be ironed out. The whole thing is based upon trust and absence of enforcement, (for non-intentional, non-egregious, non-illegal events or actions) and this is where Transport Canada is heading with iSMS, integrated Safety Management Systems. The self-monitoring process is already well underway.

[Mitch Cronin]

Re: "troublesome hydraulic overtemp snag"...

I haven't had the opportunity in quite a while, not having seen such a snag for a long time, but there was a time, with certain a/c types, that finding such a thing was as simple as firing up all hydraulics, letting them run for a time... walking around the beast with an ear to all actuators 'til you found one hissing while it was internally bypassing... add a hand to it to confirm heat, and presto, cause of snag solved.

I'd love to see the results of 1600 parameters of data collection... and see the process of trouble shooting with that data... Ain't technology awesome!

[Don Hudson]

Mitch;

The overtemp wouldn't occur until the a/c was above 250kts and it slowly crept up on the green system. It was intermittent, (an AME's nightmare!) and a long-standing snag with lots of (expensive) parts replacements.

I loaded all available parameters onto a screen and it looked like a cross between a Rorshach test and something done by Calder (who painted Braniff's jets, remember?). It took about ten minutes to load all the data!

But each parameter can be isolated and then run with others to see what the "causes" are. As I say, the data is extremely detailed in terms of valve positions, temperatures/pressures at various places in the systems, etc. There are few if any places for gremlins to hide.

Its raining. Think I'll go outside to see what that's like. (DAR).

[mrlupin]

Could not reproduce problem on ground......consider serviceable

lol (just kidding)

You can actually access alot of that info from ARTOS Mitch.I haven't goten around to figuring how to program reports from the aids menu but I have used the alpha parameter call ups to troubleshoot various problems on the Airbus 320. I am unshure how they program those things but I have seen numerous airbuses with special reports preprogrammed in to the aids program.Maintenance control can then retreive all the info when the airplane is in flight,it makes troubleshooting so much easier.

the newer buses (the a319,a321 and the 320 235 and up) all have preprogramed reports you can use when you do ground runs etc. Its alot of help,it captures all the info you need to record instantaneously.

I imagine the alpha parameters are what Don was talking about?

Eric

[Don Hudson]

Hi Eric;

I know the alpha parameters you're referring to and out of interest I often take a look on the ACMS page in the air at some of the more familiar alpha parameters. Typically I'll peek at AOA, VRTG/VACC, LATG, FPA, ROLL, RUDD out of the hundreds of discretes available. On the ground on the 340 we used NWAM to monitor the pushback to ensure the tractor didn't go over a certain nosewheel steering angle...75deg or something like that. The alpha parameter call-up page has hundreds of parameters and I've seen maintenance do the reports on systems as well.

The alpha parameters are different however from the data collected by the DMUs and downloaded to QARs using a removable 500mb PCMCIA card. The software affords a far richer 1600+ parameter map and is a separate technical operation from the ACMS.

The FDA software affords a look at three kinds of parameters: - discrete (on-off, up-down, extended-retracted etc), rate parameters, (roll, pitch, yaw, rotation on takeoff, sidestick movement, rudder pedal movement, valve position change, acceleration etc) and quantity parameters, (pressures, temperatures, g-loads, speeds, most of which also can also be rate-of-change). They're ultimately (after much de-cryption, flight de-identification) placed on an Excel spreadsheet from which traces are made through SQL language commands.

I can't speak to the differences between the two because I don't know the details of how maintenance actually uses the ACMS in troubleshooting. However, the FDA program downloads all parameters and ultimately applies graphs or traces to the engineering data so one can examine what's happening in several systems in any of the 10 phases of Airbus operation. Its likely no substitute but another rich tool in the box.

I know one thing. ACTS first dismissed the capabilities of the FDA program under the same reasoning (that ARTOS is sufficient) but today are making a number of requests from the FDA program, so its doing something for them in addition to the rest of the diagnostics already available.

However, all this is a secondary outcome to FDA's primary use which is trend monitoring and aircraft SOP validation for the purposes of flight safety. Its a tool that affords a very rich picture, including animation, of how the fleet is being flown, how its performing and how abnormalities are being handled, (like go-arounds, TCAS events, GPWS events, approaches, etc) over the entire fleet.

How FDA will benefit ACTS is an open question and will be for some time. There are certainly excellent tools already available, so I'll be interested in seeing where it goes.

[Mitch Cronin]

Eric... I'm well familiar with AIDS alpha call-ups and somewhat less familiar, though have dabbled with some of the hex labels to find various valve positions etc... For real time, right now, what's it doing stuff, that is indeed a great tool for us. What Don' seems to be talking about is something that actually records all of that info and more, for later use...

I looked for someone with info on the hydraulic snag Don mentioned last night.... I found a guy who knew of the snag (a/c 903 he thought)... and had diddled with a few FMR's, but he hadn't heard anything of the final fix.

Unfortunately, that's one area where I've found things tend to fall flat. People who once tried to diagnose troubles often don't ever become aware of what it was that eventually worked. Sometimes the info is available in ARTOS... sometimes only the absence of any continued complaints leaves one guessing.... especially when multiple components have been thrown at finding a fix.

I've often thought it would be a good idea for someone in training to publish some of the details of some snags and processes that lead to a final solution, with the results.... Our "history" searches often leave much to be desired.... and proper trouble shooting sometimes seems non-existant, or at least evidence that it's been done can sometimes be very hard to find.... which leaves us having to start from square one at times.

Forgive me.... I'm rambling.... need sleep.

[mrlupin]

  The alpha parameters are different however from the data collected by the DMUs and downloaded to QARs using a removable 500mb PCMCIA card. The software affords a far richer 1600+ parameter map and is a separate technical operation from the ACMS

Don,

Maybe I am wrong on this one but all the data you are collecting seems to be available through the alpha parameter call ups.We can read valve positions in % of open,valve on or off,temp sensors,pressure transducers,pressure switches, engine parameters flight control position,AC speed, etc just to name a few.

I imagine the QAR data disk makes it more readable and more user friendly, specially if you can get a graph to show the data over time.When we use the alpha call ups we only get real time info.So we don't see what happened before during the flight unless a trigger was programed into aids to send a report (then we would see it through Artos)

The FDA software affords a look at three kinds of parameters: - discrete (on-off, up-down, extended-retracted etc), rate parameters, (roll, pitch, yaw, rotation on takeoff, sidestick movement, rudder pedal movement, valve position change, acceleration etc) and quantity parameters, (pressures, temperatures, g-loads, speeds, most of which also can also be rate-of-change). They're ultimately (after much de-cryption, flight de-identification) placed on an Excel spreadsheet from which traces are made through SQL language commands.

All those parameters are available through the alpha call ups.They just aren't presented very nicely compared to QAR. I hope to get more info on this QAR in the furure as it could be a great help in troubleshooting!!

Eric

[mrlupin]

Unfortunately, that's one area where I've found things tend to fall flat. People who once tried to diagnose troubles often don't ever become aware of what it was that eventually worked. Sometimes the info is available in ARTOS... sometimes only the absence of any continued complaints leaves one guessing.... especially when multiple components have been thrown at finding a fix.

I agree Mitch,I find alot of snags are being fixed by replacing 2 or three parts.When you do it that way it hard to tell what was wrong(not to mention the horendous cost to the company to get everything tested again).We call that shot gun troubleshooting!!

I try to keep track of the airplanes I have worked on but did not manage to fix.That way,when you are lucky you can check through artos and see what did fix the problem.Of course that all depends on how it was fixed.....

Its so much easier if you do the entire troubleshooting and don't have to rely on the previous guys who worked on the snag.I suspect this QAR would be a great asset to us in troubleshooting the day to day snags.You can never get to much info when your hunting down thr problems....

Gets some sleep Mitch!!

Eric

[Mitch Cronin]

Gets some sleep Mitch!!

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....

I'm gone...

Cheers mate.