> How detailed was the Airbus post-flight inspection, anyway?

Well, they said -

> Airbus said that it took advantage of scheduled development test
> flights to assess the impact of the ash cloud caused by the
> Eyjafjallaj=F6kull volcano on the aircraft and their flight systems.


> The A380 MSN 4 operated up to FL300 (approximately 30,000ft or 9,100m)
> and landed at 18:00 after three hours and 50 minutes of flight in
> French airspace. Similarly, the A340-600 MSN 360 flew up to FL410
> (around 40,000ft) and landed at 19:40 after five hours of flight in
> French and German airspace. The experimental flight test crew observed
> aircraft and engine behaviours while in the ash cloud.

> According to Airbus, the test crew did not notice anything abnormal
> and the post-flight inspection showed no irregularities.  Airbus has
> passed this information to engine manufacturers and airworthiness
> authorities to support them in evaluating safe conditions for flight.

I'd guess that given that these were part of a developmental program
that they didn't do anything more than flip off the engines, strip
them down completely and submit the relevant turbine surfaces to a
microscopic examination and best available same day metallurgical
analysis. Or, any less.

I think that in the context "post flight inspection" may cover quite a lot.
Note that this is Airbus per se testing new iron.
There are few official cowboy stunts in such procedures - the cost of
doing so as part of a developmental program could be immense in the
long term.



B,IMBW :-)

              Russell

-- =

http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist