Airframes

Checking up
on the 767
Requirements for Boeing 767 heavy maintenance services each year are
expected to have increased by almost a third by 2020. Nevertheless, annual
numbers of heavy checks will continue to reflect original delivery cycles, with
peaks and troughs; Ian Goold discovers that about 140 D checks next year will
grow in volume to about 180 two years later

D
emand for Boeing 767 heavy-
maintenance D-check capacity in
the coming decade, based on cyclic
aircraft-delivery trends and an assumed six-year
inspection interval, will peak in 2019 at about 190.
That is 30% higher than this year’s expected
requirement for around 145, according to Boeing.
“Knowing that major checks are spread out
more evenly, it is more appropriate to take a
five-year rolling-average view,” says director of
maintenance economics at Boeing, K.M. Ali.“This
indicates that demand is expected to rise 10%
during the next 10 years.”
Boeing puts the 2015-20 five-year annual
average at some 175 aircraft. This will follow a
steep increase in such work from just over 140
next year to 180 in 2013. TIMCO Aviation Services
says the demand crest in three years’ time will
precede an overall retraction in the size of the
fleet, producing a gradual downward trend for
the duration of the decade. Nevertheless, overall

8 MRO Management www.mromanagement.com − June 2010


size of the 767 market will remain large relative
to other fleets, says marketing and business-
development vice-president Leonard Kazmerski.
For American Airlines (AA), increased 767
maintenance demand is linked to ageing-aircraft
inspections and a higher incidence of corrosion
uncovered during structural inspections: “[the]
predicted span time for these inspections increases
as [aircraft] age past their fourth heavy check.”
A factor in extended 767 operational lives is
the industry’s wait for the Boeing 787, according
to Ireland’s Shannon Aerospace (SAL): “We see a
continuing demand for 767 heavy maintenance
as the aircraft [are] remaining in service longer
than anticipated. As the overall fleet age grows,
the airframe will generate more maintenance,”
says marketing & sales head Paul Murray.
“continued delays in the 787 had a positive effect
on residual aircraft values and operators have had
to extend the operation of these aircraft and, in
some cases, ‘source’ additional 767 capacity.”
In the much longer term, Frankfurt-based
Lufthansa technik Maintenance International
(LtMI) foresees “stagnation” in check events,
driven by “significantly reduced deliveries” of
more recent new-build 767s. Boeing’s Ali is
June 2010 − www.mromanagement.com
confident there is adequate capacity in all
regions.“We have not heard reports of shortage
to perform [c and D] checks on the 767. Being
a mid-sized airplane, the hangar space
requirement is common to many other airplanes
and the few [demand] peaks are easily met by
space and labour capacity.”
MRO providers AMEcO, Aveos, SAL and
tIMcO agree, although the latter warns: “A
return of high fuel prices could mean fewer
options in some regions as the cost of ferrying
aircraft exceeds labour or currency exchange
economies, but these will likely be exceptional.”
LtMI points out that there might even be some
over-capacity, while SAL sees “occasional
demand for a winter slot at short notice”, but
insufficient “to warrant a second [767] line.”
Operations with the 767 – Boeing’s first
twin-aisle design – began almost 28 years ago,
in August 1982, the oldest example having
logged a relatively modest 76,901 flight-hours
(FH) and 19,290 flight-cycles (Fc) by 1 April this
year. the fleet-leaders have recorded almost
102,000 FH (a Series 300EREM) and some
46,450 Fc (a ‘vanilla’ 767-300), respectively,
according to Boeing (see Table 1).
Airframes
(photo: Ian Harbison)
Over the life of the 767, the maintenance
schedule, which applies to all 767 models and
sub-variants, has evolved as operators reported
their inspection findings. For aircraft systems,
the original 3,000-FH c check interval has grown
in stages to the 6,000 Fc per 18 months
frequency introduced in 2007. On the airframe
structure, the initial 3,000-Fc interval remains
today, but the related maximum 15-month
frequency was extended to 18 months in 1990.
the 4c check is a straight four-times multiple
of the c check values.
In line maintenance, structural A check
inspections have always been required at 300-Fc
intervals. Equivalent systems check requirements
have been relaxed steadily from every 250 Fc
to the 750 Fc adopted three years ago.
LtMI chief commercial officer Altfried Nessel
points out that several operators have increased
c check interval to 24 months. El Al Israel Airlines,
for example, has established 767 A checks every
500 FH and c checks every 5,500 FH, or 18 months
(whichever comes first). Nessel says that for
low-utilisation aircraft, such as those in corporate
operations, A and c checks are normally driven by
respective 90-day or 24-month calendar limits.
MRO Management 9
Airframes

Another element of 767 maintenance has resulted in “a significant reduction in the director Lynne Thompson, 767 operators
evolution has been the incorporation of corrosion number of tasks required, with many repeat generally package checks “in line with the
protection and control and structural-inspection inspections having been removed”. Boeing maintenance-planning document (MPD),
programmes, says SAL engineering and planning According to Boeing Commercial Aviation but [over time] have added inspection
head Mick O’Dwyer. This “most notable change” Services (BCAS) maintenance-engineering requirements and optimised existing
requirements beyond [the] MPD”.
The manufacturer can provide high- or low-
Table 1: Boeing 767 fleet leaders (by hours and cycles) utilisation packages, says TIMCO’s Kazmerski.
“Operators [are free] to move more routine work
Series Sub-variant Hours Cycles
to smaller line checks or special route visits due to
200 79,929 42,556
the decoupling of a specific check.” He concedes
200 EM 90,989 40,698
that such adjustment brings attendant risk:
200 ER 42,602 6,380
“Operators and maintenance providers need to
200 EREM 96,458 29,131
exercise increased responsibility and management
200 ERSF 83,858 30,443 of the overall maintenance programme”.
200 SF 73,896 43,899 In developing 767 maintenance procedures,
300 69,698 46,452 AA has followed the Industry Steering
300 BCF 59,366 25,717 Committee (ISC) requirements that use the
300 EM 71,350 43,842 MSG-3 philosophy when adjusting increments
300 EREM 101,914 31,543 for the required inspections and also utilise
300 F 62,879 15,611 the ISC’s Reliability Programme to make
400 ER 43,164 9,699 necessary adjustments.
Fleet leaders 101,914 46,452 For China’s Ameco Beijing, there is no general
source: Boeing Commercial Airplanes rule as to how operators plan maintenance:
“[We] can’t judge this. Each work package we

=
X C Our lean burn technOlOgy
by hundreds Of degrees fOr fewer
The lower the temperature, the lower the NOx emission levels. The lower the
temperature, the longer the engine lasts. Burning up to 16% less fuel, producing 50%

receive is different”. No current LTMI customer’s
767 makes use of MSG-3 packaged maintenance,
while SAL has found “a small number have
packages designed to optimise requirements
– usually aligned along extended-range
twin-engine operations (ETOPS) and critical tasks.
As [most] have one or two 767s, it usually makes
more sense to utilise the MPD”.
MROs found early-build 767s in generally
good condition at initial heavy checks,
although some problem areas have emerged
subsequently. El Al reports no special “issues”,
while AMECO says there are “always cracks” in
floor beams at body station (BS) 246.
For LTMI, early work was “rather smooth”,
although major findings at later checks included
“pylon migrated shims, corrosion in wet areas,
[and] cracks at STA246”. SAL cites “corrosion
relating to [the] floor and aft galleys” as being
among more-frequent occurrences. “Engines
on the 767 experienced [early] vibration, but
this has been resolved”. Early aircraft suffered
“significant corrosion and stress cracks under
the [cabin] monuments [for which] inadequate
Mylar installation seemed to be the root cause”,
OOL
reduces cOmbustOr temperature
nOx emissiOns. that’s the pOwer Of
less NOx, emitting up to 16% less CO2 and reducing noise by 10-15 decibels, the
remarkable CFM* LEAP-X is the coolest engine around. Visit www.cfm56.com/xpower
according to TIMCO, which has had few
lower-lobe concerns.
Considering later-build 767s, the newest AA
machines’ initial heavy checks (in the past two
years) have been “consistent with light
maintenance and can be generalised as wear
and tear. Some ‘issues’ [were] identified with
wiring bundles that are not exposed during
light and intermediate maintenance”. AA says
the volume of non-routine write-ups with the
first two heavy visits was comparable.
Nevertheless, older 767s undergoing third and
fourth heavy checks around the same time
“had 13% and 65% more non-routine
write-ups, respectively”.
TIMCO also identifies flap-fitting cracks as
seeming “more abundant in later models than
with earlier versions”, while tail and cowling
delamination appears “almost routinely”. Cabin
corrosion and stress cracks also remain
a characteristic.
Newer aircraft with in-flight entertainment
systems introduce further potential defects, such
as in software, which can generate “difficulties
in sourcing parts”, says SAL. The Irish MRO also
x.
CFM, CFM56 and the CFM logo are all trademarks of CFM International, a 50/50 joint company of Snecma and General Electric Co.
*
Airframes
reports that inspection of the engine-pylon
mid-spar closeout angle often requires
unscheduled pylon removal during C checks and
consequent extended ground-times. SAL has
found a way to apply the approved repair
on-wing without pylon removal, for which it
claims a significant advantage in cost and
ground-time.
Engines on the 767
experienced [early]
vibration, but this has
been resolved
Paul Murray, SAL
For Singapore Technologies (ST) Aerospace,
there has not been as much change between
older and younger airframes as it has seen on
alternative designs. “The Boeing 767 has a more
straightforward configuration, which results in
lesser variance between the earlier models and
the newer ones compared with other aircraft
types.” Modifications available for the 767 that
are typically introduced during heavy-
Airframes

Operators can move work from heavier checks

to smaller line checks, but must exercise
increased responsibility and management of the
entire maintenance programme, warns TIMCO
(photo: TIMCO)

beam at BS 246 and the fail-safe strap at the

BS955 bulkhead.
The BS246 floor beam is a double-depth unit
forming the step up from the passenger-cabin
floor to the flightdeck floor, a consequence of the
adoption of a common cockpit for the 767 and
smaller 757 single-aisle jetliner. According to the
relevant service bulletin, ‘stiffeners, clips, pulley-
bracket clips, the mid-chord, and webs common
to this floor beam have been found cracked on
airplanes with as few as 1,140 flight-cycles’.
Boeing analysis indicated that these cracks
maintenance checks include winglets and All Nippon Airways under Boeing’s 767-300 had been caused by fatigue from higher-than-
cabin-crew rest modules. (See box story below converted freighter programme, performs a anticipated fore and aft deflection of the beam.
for ‘significant’ airworthiness directives [ADs] number of commonly requested modifi- Since all flying-control cables need discon-
as identified by MROs [but not the cations during maintenance. These include nection, the modification leads to intensive
manufacturer] with which operators could pylon, cockpit-security door and emergency- functional checks later, advises Boeing.
comply during heavy maintenance). locator transmitter work. The most frequent ST Aerospace suggests that the BS955 fail-safe
ST Aerospace, whose work includes AD-compliance activities for ST Aerospace strap inspection/termination exercise “tends to
passenger-to-cargo conversions for Japan’s are mandatory modifications to the floor be a problem for Boeing 767 aircraft that have
not been properly maintained”.
Recent developments promulgated by the
Boeing 767 airworthiness directives 767 ISC or the Maintenance Review Board have
included integration of the zonal structure and
MROs, but not the manufacturer, have identified the following ‘significant’ US Federal
Aviation Administration airworthiness directives (ADs) among those with which corrosion-prevention and control programme
operators could comply during heavy maintenance (CPCP). TIMCO says increased inspection intervals
have been accompanied by increased sampling,
AD 2003-13-03 – Pressure bulkhead insulation modification following “insignificant” findings, while LTMI
AD 2003-18-10 – Airworthiness limitation inspection notes the development of a new online
AD 2004-16-12 – Nacelle strut and wing structure improvement programme forum whereby operators may exchange 767
AD 2004-19-06 – Body station 955 fail-safe strap NDT inspection experiences. The forum gives vendors reading
AD 2006-11-12 – Elevator and rudder free-play inspections access to vendor-specific posting items to
AD 2006-24-04 – Body station 1809.5 bulkhead inspection for cracks (see NPRM
enhance the flow of information. LTMI says a
FAA-2010-0033 below)
“working-together-team” has been founded to
AD 2009-06-08 – Wing skin inspection
cover ATA36 problems.
AD 2009-18-02 – Fuel-tank fasteners
AD 2009-21-07 – Clevis pins and hardware inspection (CF6-powered 767-300s) Notable developments for SAL include
AD 2009-23-04 – Main fuel tank boost-pump feed-through connector airworthiness limits and certification maintenance
AD 2010-03-08 – Nacelle/pylon – strut-attachment mid-spar fuse pin inspection requirements, which it sees mainly “in relation
to fuel-tank systems. Fuel-quantity indicating
Boeing 767 notices of proposed rulemaking systems are an example [that] often results in a
large number of findings.”
Recent US Federal Aviation Administration Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs) for
Boeing’s Ali says that the advent of 767 ETOPS
the 767, identified by MROs, include:
flights in the 1980s saw engine maintenance
and reliability set new standards. Fleet-wide,
2010-0033 – Supersedes existing airworthiness directive for inspection of Body Station
1809.5 bulkhead Ali says the 767 has “shown improved engine
2010-0044 –Crew oxygen system part-number inspection removal rates of 20 to 30% in the past five to
2010-0127 – Entryway-door inspection of movable ceiling panel 10 years” across the aircraft’s four engine types:
2010-0277 – Upper wingskin panel inspection for cracks General Electric (GE) CF6-80, Pratt & Whitney
2010-0377 – Inspection of outboard-slat main-track downstop-assembly (P&W) JT9D-7R4 and PW4000, and Rolls-Royce
(R-R) RB211-524H.“Engine on-wing work has

12 MRO Management www.mromanagement.com − June 2010

Airframes
been reduced for routine and non-routine
maintenance with the increase of servicing and
inspection intervals.”
As a heavy-maintenance provider, TIMCO
reports that all 767 variants have performed well.
“We’ve found this in traditionally problematic
areas, as well as with the frequency and extent
of non-routine [jobs].” LTMI confirms that
maintenance increases with age, but has seen
no “abnormal rise in findings”, with average
engine on-wing of 18,000 to 22,000 FHs. SAL
agrees, but notes one difference among
customers:“End-of-lease aircraft tend to require
a lot of work, while [customer-owned] aircraft
will arrive in better overall condition.”
How well did 767 direct maintenance costs
(DMCs) meet targets at entry into service (EIS)
in 1982, and later on mature aircraft? Boeing’s
Ali explains that 767 design was initiated in the
days before deregulation in 1978, at a time
when there were no specific maintenance-cost
improvement targets.
“The 767 was certainly designed to get the
lowest maintenance cost. Industry feedback
has shown that the actual maintenance cost
was lower than expected. We have seen a 20%
reduction of airframe maintenance cost in the
last 28 years. There have been continuous
reductions due to [product] improvements,
modifications, reliability of components, and the
maintenance programme,” according to the
maintenance-economics director.
What 767 developments arising from
in-service experience have contributed most to
reduced maintenance costs? Boeing attributes
the greatest reduction to increased inspection
intervals and fewer check tasks, a view endorsed
by SAL. “Some new [work was] added to allow
early detection and rectification of defects before
costs became too high,” says Ali. “Another factor
has been increased competition among
14 MRO Management
Figure 1: 767 D check forecast
D check hangar requirement (five-year moving average) will be 10% more in 10 years
D checks will peak in 10 years to be ~30% more than in 2010
200
180
160
140
D check occurrence
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
[maintenance] suppliers and MROs [which]
allows airlines to get the best possible cost
without compromising reliability.”
The manufacturer acknowledges initial
corrosion problems reported around the 767’s
landing-gear pivot points and bushings – resolved
by changes in bushing design, increased
lubrication, and better greases and processes.
“This resulted in significant reductions in [landing-
gear] overhaul costs during the last 15 years.”
Operators very often have their own
philosophies in dealing with incidental
maintenance tasks, according to TIMCO’s
Kazmerski. “Some drive significant find-and-fix
events, mainly cabin-oriented, during overnight
checks, [which] reduces the frequency of
175 D checks,
five-year average
146 D checks
in 2010
non-routine [jobs to be performed] during
heavy visits. Others, driven by their respective
reliability-analysis groups, tack on numerous
[tasks] with shorter checks to prevent major
issues during [heavy checks].”
LTMI says the extended check intervals
reduced aircraft ground time and “enabled
maintenance packages to be adjusted to [make]
most efficient use of resources”. The MRO
provides an example of investment in new
equipment paying dividends. “An installed fuel
system was replaced with [one] from a different
vendor. The new system is much more reliable,
and allows [the operator] to check the amount
of loaded fuel after refuelling.”
Overall, the 767 is not associated with a large
volume of component change work, says SAL.
“The issue of monitoring is more relevant, with
the aircraft cabin being the most costly. An
operator can achieve significant savings by
‘tweaking’and staggering its cabin modifications
and updates over the aircraft’s lifetime.”
What reduction in DMC can be expected by
an operator replacing mature 767s with new
(or much younger) 767s? One way to reduce
airframe maintenance cost, of course, is to
AMECO has found every work package is different
for the 767, although there are always cracks in
the floor beams (photo: AMECO Beijing)
www.mromanagement.com − June 2010
Airframes

buy a new 767, for which Boeing says costs would

“be less than half of a 25-year-old 767 (10-year
average)”. Other cost considerations for airlines
replacing older fleets or converting passenger
aircraft into freighters are said to include higher
fuel-burn due to drag, engine deterioration, and
weight increase. AA received its 767s in three
distinct delivery batches, but variations in
operational performance among these groups
are “not statistically significant”. the airline
confirms that operating cost and days lost to
maintenance do increase, but “the operational
performance is generally similar”.
A major positive for any operator, and an
incentive to replace mature 767s with newer
examples, is offered by SAL: “A younger 767
would avoid a Body Station 955 inspection and
Delays to the 787 programme have kept demand up for the 767 and maintenance work has naturally
strut-improvement programme in the near followed. This has helped companies such as TAP Maintenance & Engineering in Brazil (photo: Ian Harbison)
future, both of which involve high costs and
extended ground times.” Documents covering 767 maintenance have LtMI sees the switch from microfiche data
How do maintenance requirements differ also evolved over time, most obviously with as having been a milestone. “In addition,
among 767s powered by respective GE, P&W, or digital technology replacing paperwork. ‘My introduction of communication with Boeing via
R-R powerplants? Boeing says that individual Boeing Fleet’has introduced Fleet team Digests internet and web-based training contributed
maintenance requirements do not vary greatly (FtD), a search engine useful when investigating to an improvement in quality.”
among 767s powered by the different engines non-routine tasks, reports Aveos. Maintenance Similarly, SAL appreciates the changes:
available. “the routine inspections, filter training has evolved with tools such as computer- “Previously, it was up to the customer to supply
replacements, and such like, are done at about based training, a point also noted by El Al. the MRO provider with a large volume of
the same intervals. Off-wing engine maintenance tIMcO says the “rules surrounding documen- paperwork to include every task card and
is performed in accordance with an operator’s tation of maintenance have remained stable”, with associated service-bulletin documentation. Now,
approved maintenance programme, in [customer] operators adding requirements for their as Boeing has gone online, we can access all
conjunction with the respective engine OEM specific fleets as regulatory requirements have relevant materials for a project via the internet,
work-scope planning document,” says Ali. dictated”. Many 767 maintenance-programme on cD-Rom, or even directly via the customer’s
Aveos perceives an unspecified advantage changes have been driven by factors applied to own computer server.
for Pratt & Whitney-powered aircraft, but“all [are] other aircraft types as well, according to Kazmerski. “Our ability to access the work package early
pretty much the same” otherwise. tIMcO also On MRO 767 maintenance-training means that we can ensure [we are] fully prepared
sees no major differences. “tooling availability programmes, he says adjustments have been ahead of a maintenance event. crucially, the
can sometimes be an issue, depending on the made “to the basic general familiarisation customer is also saved a lot of work in advance
scope of an operator’s maintenance programme,” courses as trend data has become available, of the aircraft’s arrival at the [maintenance]
says Kazmerski. or as regulatory changes have dictated”. facility,” concludes SAL.

Table 2
A check history c check history 2010 current intervals

Systems Systems Systems 750FH

A check
Year Flight hours Year Flight hours Months Structures 300Fc
1982 250 1982 3,000 N/A Systems 6,000FH/
1986 300 1990 4,000 N/A 18 months
C check
1990 400 1994 5,000 18 Structures 3,000Fc/
1994 500 18 months
1997 6,000 18
2007 750 Systems 24,000FH/
Structures
72 months
Structures Year Flight cycles Months 4C check*
Structures 12,000Fc/
Year Flight cycles 1982 3,000 15 72 months
1982 300 1990 3,000 18 * 4c checks are multiples of 1c

16 MRO Management www.mromanagement.com − June 2010