15.07.2013 Views

Download - Royal Australian Navy

Download - Royal Australian Navy

Download - Royal Australian Navy

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

64 NAVY ENGINEERING BULLETIN SEPTEMBER 2003<br />

aircraft are damaged during<br />

combat than lost completely.<br />

Through the application of rapid<br />

repair techniques, ABDR can<br />

return a damaged aircraft to<br />

service in the shortest possible<br />

time frame, whether the aircraft<br />

has been rendered unserviceable<br />

due to structural or system<br />

damage. ABDR employs locally<br />

designed, authorised and applied<br />

repairs utilising non-standard<br />

materials, tools and equipment in<br />

order to minimise aircraft<br />

downtime.<br />

ABDR is not an acceptable<br />

peacetime maintenance action,<br />

but can be used under certain<br />

circumstances to quickly repair a<br />

damaged aircraft so it can be<br />

flown out of further harms way.<br />

Implementing CMAINT and ABDR<br />

is a prerogative of the<br />

operational commander when<br />

contingencies are declared or<br />

warlike situations encountered. A<br />

potential downside for<br />

implementing CMAINT or ABDR<br />

is that the aircraft must be able<br />

to be returned to peacetime<br />

standards if required, once the<br />

contingency is over. Where<br />

CMAINT conditions have been<br />

implemented over a protracted<br />

period or the aircraft has<br />

undertaken a significant<br />

workload under such conditions,<br />

a considerable maintenance<br />

effort may be needed to properly<br />

complete any structural repairs<br />

and re-establish scheduled<br />

maintenance programs.<br />

So why has the RAN Aviation<br />

community suddenly started<br />

focusing on ABDR, and how<br />

does it impact our<br />

preparedness for combat?<br />

In early 2002 two separate<br />

aircraft structural repair<br />

instances highlighted a<br />

deficiency in the airframe repair<br />

capability of RAN ships’ Flights.<br />

Both instances were<br />

satisfactorily resolved by the<br />

Fleet Air Arm’s Mobile Aircraft<br />

Support Team (MAST), but<br />

arguably should have fallen<br />

within the capabilities of the<br />

ships’ Flights. Investigations<br />

revealed that both Flights lacked<br />

the required proficiency,<br />

confidence, and in some<br />

instances tooling and<br />

consumables to conduct the<br />

necessary repairs. This situation<br />

presented a significant capability<br />

risk. Central to this situation was<br />

an historical reliance to call on<br />

contractor assistance almost<br />

every time a complex airframe<br />

structural repair was required to<br />

be expediently completed at<br />

NAS Nowra. This practice had<br />

resulted in a subsequent 'deskilling'<br />

of the AT workforce.<br />

To rectify this situation, staff<br />

within the Fleet Aviation<br />

Engineering Unit (FAEU) set<br />

about assessing the existing level<br />

of tooling, material and AT<br />

sheetmetal repair skills in the<br />

embarked environment, and then<br />

compared the existing capability<br />

to what is required of an<br />

embarked ABDR/SMR baseline<br />

capability. The overall intention of<br />

the review was to ensure ships<br />

Flights were able to carry out, as<br />

a minimum, repairs detailed in<br />

the aircraft specific Structural<br />

Repair Manuals. Training and<br />

competency in the concept of<br />

ABDR, although not an initial<br />

focus, was also an objective.<br />

So where to begin?<br />

As with any situation, the ability<br />

to operate safely outside<br />

specified standard procedures<br />

requires a thorough<br />

understanding of, and ability to<br />

correctly carry out, those<br />

procedures. Therefore, in order to<br />

carry out CMAINT and ABDR<br />

procedures personnel must first<br />

have an in-depth understanding<br />

of electrical and structural repairs<br />

carried out with all the necessary<br />

resources and in accordance with<br />

approved standard procedures.<br />

FAEU Staff, in conjunction with<br />

ABDR is not an acceptable<br />

peacetime maintenance<br />

action, but can be used<br />

under certain circumstances<br />

to quickly repair a damaged<br />

aircraft so it can be flown<br />

out of further harms way.<br />

Training Authority - Aviation (TA-<br />

AVN) and the ABDR School at<br />

RAAF Williamtown, devised a<br />

method for evaluating a Flights’<br />

structural repair capability,<br />

including their understanding of<br />

existing procedures. The<br />

evaluation employed the use of a<br />

'repair simulator' that replicated a<br />

section of an aircraft's structure,<br />

incorporating skin, frames,<br />

stringers, hydraulic lines and<br />

electrical looms. The simulators<br />

were employed during a ship’s<br />

Work-up and Unit Readiness<br />

Evaluation (URE) and were predamaged<br />

to reflect varying<br />

degrees of ‘battle damage’<br />

expected to be sustained during<br />

a contingency scenario. The<br />

simulators were required to be<br />

repaired by the ship's Flight<br />

within a specified time frame,<br />

with technical personnel ‘thinking<br />

outside the box’ where necessary.<br />

The repair capability deficiencies<br />

identified by the exercises<br />

provided a clear indication of<br />

where efforts should be expended<br />

in order to improve a Flights’<br />

repair capabilities. Typical<br />

examples of the simulators and<br />

damage are shown in figures<br />

1to4.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!