231–240 of 386 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pilot can't go out and replace the brake pad on the tarmac. Technician busts out the ODB code-reader and says: "Huh, needs a new left brake pad"
> Technician busts out the ODB code-reader I assume you mean OBD (on board diagnostics), not Ol Dirty B*stard, who has a very different set of codes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does the wire from the removable pad couple electronically with the permanent housing? Is it like a contact plate or is there an actual m-f style plug?
I'm not sure I understand the question. When the techs install a new brake assembly, the wiring harness is connected at the same time as the hydraulic system. The pad itself is never changed on the flight line. It's quicker and easier to change the entire assembly and have the worn brakes rebuilt in a second line shop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would be curious about things like lubrication and the hydraulic systems where deferring maintenance is easy but repairs once there are problems are potentially very costly. Hopefully the manufacturers can get some of the data back, it seems like this kind of deferred maintenance is an experiment nobody would run willingly but given that it's happening the data could help improve safe and efficient fleet operations…
Maintenance issues are constantly fed back to the design teams that adjust the designs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given the Max 8 debacle [0], I'd agree we don't seem to have many great rules around this. [0] https://apnews.com/article/boeing-max-crashes-faa-ea8fac0ad2...
The difference in this case is that when the Max-8s crashed they were no longer airworthy and were not re-flown.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure I understand the question. When the techs install a new brake assembly, the wiring harness is connected at the same time as the hydraulic system. The pad itself is never changed on the flight line. It's quicker and easier to change the entire assembly and have the worn brakes rebuilt in a second line shop.
Ah I see, I had envisioned a pad that was replaceable like an individual brake pad on a car
Why would you deactivate the brakes, rather than just tell the pilots "don't use the brakes unless it's absolutely necessary, and use thrust reversers instead"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you for that link. In case anyone else is wondering, this is a Telegram chat with actual pilots in it. There is currently a lot of cursing in that thread about stupid sensational news on the topic, along with an actual explanation. Aeroflot is disabling 1 out of 4 brakes, not all 4. Nobody is actually trying to stop a plane with just reverse thrusters.
This feels like “it’s not as bad as it seems. Only three rooms are currently on fire, not twelve.” …They’re disabling brakes?
I don't know if that claim is actually true, mind, but it sounds like a problem that has multiple levels of solutions still to go before it becomes catastrophic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am more surprised there is not a sufficiently rich black-market operation going around sanctions. Random site[0] says, >In general, airplane brakes can last between 1000-2000 landings before they are changed. An active airplane makes an estimate of two landings per day; this means the airplane needs to be changed after 18-36 months. Even at multiple brake pads(?) per plane, that does not sound an insurmountable amo…
Black market from where? If caught selling parts to Russia, you'll be banned by Airbus and Boeing, meaning you can't maintain your own fleet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect they'll start making their own, if they haven't already been.
they don't have proper specs, manufacturing equipment, materials, engineers, machinists, etc. they been trying to source parts from india, china, iran, etc.
A big reason this may not be true for aircraft parts is that in most countries buying unapproved aftermarket parts is illegal at least for commercial airlines. Not so for autombile parts.
I'm curious the actual mechanics of this operation. The main primary-source I found is a Telegram post of an Aeroflot pilot memo [0], but this only discusses the side-effects of reverser only braking, not the mechanics of "disabling the brakes." There is a possibility the brakes are still available and not worn through, and this is a preemptive measure to leave enough brake material to handle an emergency rejected ta…
The story looks like a penny dreadful of “Russia is doomed” series. 1. There’s no info on that Russian slide about actual planes flying without any breaks at all. There’s a manufacturer defined minimum equipment list that allows planes to have some breaks (actual number depends on the type of a plane) disabled for, let’s say, 10 days at the most. This is absolutely normal as planes cannot be serviced constantly (they…
That sounds like a hazard in itself, airlines being forced to buy parts outside of official supply lines makes it much easier for unscrupulous sellers to substitute counterfeit parts.