I've found a 737 maintenance planning data document produced by Boeing, which gives a suggested schedule on page 6.
I've also found a British Airways Fact Book document, which on the last page gives a schedule.
So who decides how often an aircraft and its individual components should be inspected? Is it the manufacturer, the airline, or somebody else? Is there a set standard or does this differ between manufacturers/airlines/countries?
The manufacturer lists all maintenance that should be done, and when. This is the first document you found, from Boeing. Some of this maintenance may be required, other things might be recommended.
The operator can use that plan, while following maintenance laws (e.g. the required annual inspection). Or, they can submit a new rolling maintenance plan to their National Aviation Authority (e.g. FAA) for approval, which is usually done to prevent large downtime events for the aircraft. (This "rolling inspection" is done so that all of the necessary things are inspected at the proper intervals, but not all at the same time.)
There's a bit more, too: the Aviation Authorities can create Airworthiness Directives that can add additional required maintenance that must be done within certain limits (usually hourly, but can be situation dependent) for the aircraft to be airworthy.
I've found a 737 maintenance planning data document produced by Boeing, which gives a suggested schedule on page 6. I've also found a British Airways Fact Book document, which on the last page gives a schedule. So who decides how often an aircraft and its individual components should be inspected? Is it the manufacturer, the airline, or somebody else? Is there a set standard or does this differ between manufacturers/airlines/countries?
If an incident occurs on board an aircraft in flight which could be considered as criminal in one country, what decides which country the incident falls under? For example, if a man was found to be in possession of "virtual" child pornography and not all of the countries involved consider that to be illegal, which country is the one who decides whether the person have broken the law or not?
Is there a Canadian law or regulation which requires me to have my Radiotelephone Operator's Restricted Certificate (Aeronautical) on-board the aircraft with me? This is what I've found so far... service only where the person holds an appropriate radio operator certificate [...] However, I can't find a regulation saying I need the piece of paper with me. An example of the wording Canada..., and the certificate, when exercising those privileges. I can't find that wording or anything like it relating to my radio operator's certificate in the CARS, the Radiocommunications Regulations
I've noticed that on some airlines (I may have seen it on SAS) the cabin crew had a small touchscreen at the front of the plane which they were using to select recorded audio messages etc, in both their language, and English. Searching the internet, I found out it's called a Flight Attendant Panel — here are some photos I found: So I gather they can control the lighting, and movies; but what else can these panels do? I also found a FAP trainer, which says: This virtual training environment generates a realistic FAP representation including OBRM, CAM and PRAM What
I've been looking at the data found in various type certificate data sheets and found something that is a bit ambiguous. In reading a TCDS (like this one, for example) in the "airspeed limits" section it lists the maneuvering speed. But they don't make it clear whether they are referencing the design maneuvering speed (Va) or the Maximum operating maneuvering speed (Vo) Can anyone clarify which one they are referencing?
As an instantiation, the Boeing 737 persisted in operation and to fly for several years despite rudder issues which had not been safely ascertained and resolved. It's conceivable that flyers who avoided the aircraft had had less probability of injury or death while flying.
which periodically transmitted maintenance data to a remote Airbus location in Paris to alert ground crews of possible maintenance issues with inbound aircraft. Given that Airbus already uses similar technology for maintenance data (and I think I recall hearing Boeing does too), I was wondering if either Airbus, Boeing, or the FAA, plan to facilitate or mandate that the CVR and FDR record...) was about Air France 447, the worst disaster in French aviation history. That investigation spent two years and $50 million just locating the CVR and FDR which were ultimately found resting 4 kilometers
My only detailed experience with carburetors is in aircraft. I'm pretty familiar with the principles behind float-type carbs, but I recently saw a schematic for a "downdraft carburetor" with a choke valve. This got me curious, so I did a little research and found that what I'm used to is an "updraft carburetor", and that (according to wikipedia) they fell out of fashion in the automotive industry in the 1930s. Why is the updraft carburetor design so prevalent in aviation? Does an updraft carb actually have a choke valve? Images below to provide a little context for those of us who
Something that just popped into my head: I've been on a few easyJet and Ryanair flights where a lot of passengers clap and cheer on touchdown. Would the pilots be able to hear this? Here's an example I found by searching YouTube: It seems pretty commonplace... but can the pilots hear them? I guess it would be distracting. Just something I was wondering!
Reading the NTSB's accident report on US1549, there is a transcript of the CVR from page 149 onwards in the PDF (marked as page 130 on hardcopy). Small clips of the ATC/crew communications exist, but I'm curious to know whether the NTSB also release the full audio recording, per the transcript provided? It's much longer than other clips I can find online. Related: Can I get official recordings of ATC audio? (asks for FAA, not NTSB).