Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/325035/

Topic: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-06 10:14:20 and read 4686 times.

Anyone on here "current" on BAC 1-11 MX Maintainence? I have some questions...

1) Once the wings are removed from ANY airliner, does that automaticly make the airframe PERMANENTLY unairworthy?

2) Are current and past AD's on the BAC111 so restrictive that its nearly impossible to return on to the air without millions of dollars in repairs and upgrades?

3) Are their any AD's on the old RR engines and are companies still able to overhaul them?

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: CitationJet
Posted 2012-11-06 10:20:41 and read 4700 times.

Quoting United727 (Thread starter):
1) Once the wings are removed from ANY airliner, does that automaticly make the airframe PERMANENTLY unairworthy?

No. I know for a fact that Cessna's Mustang has had more than one airplane have a wing replaced. There are Mustangs with new wings flying today. Replacing a wing on a later model Citation is relatively easy, given that the wing does not pass thru the fuselage, but rather is attached with four or six links (dog bones) depending on the model, and a yaw plate at BL zero.

I assume when you mean "ANY" airliner you are talking about more than just the BAC 1-11.

Also, I have learned that Cessna has replaced wings on 8 Mustangs for various reasons (bird strikes, landing incidents, ground accidents, etc.). In fact Cessna currently has 2 wings in spare parts inventory for just that purpose.

[Edited 2012-11-06 10:34:45]

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: 3MilesToWRO
Posted 2012-11-06 12:46:54 and read 4700 times.

Quoting United727 (Thread starter):
1) Once the wings are removed from ANY airliner, does that automaticly make the airframe PERMANENTLY unairworthy?

As far as I know there is a DC-9 with transplanted wing, so I'd say that no, such an airliner is only not airworthy until new wing is screwed in place  

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-11-06 18:08:12 and read 4702 times.

Quoting 3MilesToWRO (Reply 2):
Quoting United727 (Thread starter):
1) Once the wings are removed from ANY airliner, does that automaticly make the airframe PERMANENTLY unairworthy?

As far as I know there is a DC-9 with transplanted wing, so I'd say that no, such an airliner is only not airworthy until new wing is screwed in place

It was this DC-9-31, originally delivered to Northeast in 1967. With DL from 1972 with the merger. Sold to Ozark in 1975. Sold to Republic in 1985 and inherited by NW with the merger in 1986.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bob Garrard
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Richard Silagi


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ed Groenendijk
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © TJ OKeefe



On December 20, 1983, while with Ozark, it struck a snowplow while landing at Sioux Falls, SD, separating the right wing and killing the snowplow operator. It was repaired using the wing salvaged from the wreckage of the AC DC-9-32 that made an emergency landing at CVG on June 2, 1983 on a Dallas-Toronto flight with an oboard fire that started in a rear lavatory. Although it landed safetly, 23 of the 41 passengers died when overcome by smoke and fire before they could evacuate. All 5 crew survived. That was AC's most recent fatal accident.

Several photos here:
http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/sr111/Cincinnatiburning.html

The repaired DC-9 above is probably the only airliner rebuilt from parts of two aircraft that were both involved in fatal accidents.

[Edited 2012-11-06 18:09:47]

[Edited 2012-11-06 18:10:56]

[Edited 2012-11-06 18:14:14]

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: BreninTW
Posted 2012-11-06 22:08:13 and read 4698 times.

Did that DC9 go BACK to DL when DL merged with NW or was it retired before the merger?

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-07 06:55:57 and read 4698 times.

OK...Let me redirect this...the thread was specific to the BAC 111.

As for question one, the 111 in question has had its wings removed. The methods used for removal are unknown.

It currently sits on private property with the Left wing attached and the Right Wing in a makeshift, metal carrier.

The engines and systems are intact but have not been powered up in possibly a decade.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-07 07:57:55 and read 4698 times.

Quoting United727 (Reply 5):
As for question one, the 111 in question has had its wings removed. The methods used for removal are unknown.

The removal method doesn't really matter for airworthiness...what matters is whether it meets requirements after it's put back together. Since you can't show it was done via approved engineering, that will probably mean a thorough and painful inspection by a DER.

Quoting United727 (Reply 5):
The engines and systems are intact but have not been powered up in possibly a decade.

In theory, if the life-limited parts are replaced and they pass functional checks after power-up, they're good. However, the chances off that are pretty much nil. Wholesale replacement is probably faster.

Tom.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-07 09:40:22 and read 4698 times.

Thanks Tom...Would you like to see some pics of this beast?? It's literally in someones backyard outside of Chicago. I would imagine corrosion is going to be a rather huge headache. :/

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-07 16:41:52 and read 4697 times.

If I could get permission, AND THAT'S A BIG "IF", would anyone want to work on a project similar to that of the RB211 in the UK??? But this time, have the entire plane including two complete old school RR engines, less the Right wing for the moment (it's there but detached).

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-07 17:59:13 and read 4697 times.

Quoting United727 (Reply 8):
If I could get permission, AND THAT'S A BIG "IF", would anyone want to work on a project similar to that of the RB211 in the UK???

I'd do what I could. I have no idea how productive that might be.

Tom.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-07 18:43:36 and read 4697 times.

As I told you privately, I'm making attempts to contact the owner now. WIthout his help, nothings going to happen. However, if he does come through and I have no clue what his/their reaction is going to be, then this could be an exciting project and a true way to "Save an Airliner".  

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: KELPkid
Posted 2012-11-07 22:54:53 and read 4697 times.

If you're going to move it off-airfield, why would you only remove one wing and not the other?  

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-08 06:25:34 and read 4697 times.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 11):
If you're going to move it off-airfield, why would you only remove one wing and not the other?  

This is a good question and one that I do not have an answer for. As soon as I do find out what the rational answer is, I'll let you know.

Btw, I'm putting a photo up from 2006. It was the LAST TIME this plane was photographed intact. It's from the a.net library, so thanks in advance to the photographer!!  

This photo was taken at Air Fest 2006 and would prove to be the last photo of it intact before its move.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-08 10:23:19 and read 4697 times.

Laughing, I did hear back from Rotec...It seemed the owner didn't care and saw zalled all of the flight surfaces. They then began reconstruction of the plane based on the Convair 880 in Memphis, TN (the Lisa Marie) and began putting the jig saw puzzle back together with metal plates, nuts and bolts, LOL....Note: This WAS a complete aircraft till 12/2008.

UGH.....                           

That's the END of this trek!

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-08 14:10:23 and read 4697 times.



Photo after Rotec Industry's Owner, Robert Oury, had his plane defueled and canabalized (Flight Deck and who knows what else), then cut the wings off with a sawzall for tranport! December 2008

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-08 14:13:07 and read 4697 times.



This is the remains of the plane today. Look closely at the H Stab and you'll notice the metal plates holding whats left of this rare aircraft together. After going back and forth with Rotec today, I still didn't get the question of whether the engines are intact or not, but clearly, the vibration from running engines would tear what left of the wing to pieces.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: zeke
Posted 2012-11-08 14:47:56 and read 4697 times.

Quoting United727 (Thread starter):
2) Are current and past AD's on the BAC111 so restrictive that its nearly impossible to return on to the air without millions of dollars in repairs and upgrades?

As far as I am aware, the BAC111 TCDS has been surrendered, so effectively grounded like Concorde.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-11-08 15:11:56 and read 4697 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 16):
As far as I am aware, the BAC111 TCDS has been surrendered, so effectively grounded like Concorde.

That doesn't mean grounding, that just means you'd need to re-certify as an experimental. In many ways, that would be considerably easier.

Tom.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: TZTriStar500
Posted 2012-11-08 16:11:38 and read 4697 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 16):
As far as I am aware, the BAC111 TCDS has been surrendered, so effectively grounded like Concorde.

I was curious about this and not entirely true. Airbus surrendered the EASA TC A.188:

http://www.easa.europa.eu/certificat...cation%20Information%202010-01.pdf

The FAA TC is still valid, but will not accept any more for import onto the US registry. There are still a handful here in the US, namely N164W with Northrup Grumman and N999BW:

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...006274b8/$FILE/A5EU%20Rev%2029.pdf

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: zeke
Posted 2012-11-08 16:36:59 and read 4697 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 17):
That doesn't mean grounding, that just means you'd need to re-certify as an experimental. In many ways, that would be considerably easier.

And that restricts the use.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 18):

The FAA TC is still valid, but will not accept any more for import onto the US registry. There are still a handful here in the US, namely N164W with Northrup Grumman and N999BW:

The FAA TCDS also says "Airbus has also requested that the FAA accept their surrender of the corresponding FAA import type certificate, in letter reference BA00D10027369, dated October 11, 2010."

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: imiakhtar
Posted 2012-11-08 16:41:16 and read 4697 times.

For all BAC1-11 lovers, I just found this BAC1-11 operating manual.

I almost had a heart attack! Link to the manual here:

http://www.avialogs.com/list/item/33...480usairbac-111-400operatingmanual

Courtesy of avialogs. Please support what they do:

Hi,
I started several months ago an online aviation library, http://www.avialogs.com/, it is a not for profit organization based in Montreal, Canada. We are looking for partnership now with museum and other organizations (aircraft restoration..) to bring their archive online. If you have orphan or public domains aviation books, tech manuals that you want to bring to the knowledge of public, please contact us.

We have now 5000+ documents online.

Feel free to contact us through the site or here.

Benoit - Avialogs


Aviation Online Library

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-08 16:48:51 and read 4697 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 16):
As far as I am aware, the BAC111 TCDS has been surrendered, so effectively grounded like Concorde.

This is NOT correct as there are 3 BAC 1-11's still flying in the US. Two with Northrup and one private charter plane in Dallas, TX. The FAA has not aggreed to drop the type and any BAC 1-11 "in the US" still could get a Cert of Air.

 
Quoting zeke (Reply 19):
And that restricts the use.

Currently, there are no restrictions on use of the type  

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: zeke
Posted 2012-11-08 17:12:10 and read 4697 times.

Quoting United727 (Reply 21):
The FAA has not aggreed to drop the type and any BAC 1-11 "in the US" still could get a Cert of Air.

I am not sure about that, from the TCDS "FAA Aircraft Engineering Division, Certification Policy and Procedures Branch AIR-110 is developing a policy for import product surrendered certificates, that will affect eligibility for import". The FAA also only certified a subset of BAC-111s, not all models are eligible in the US. probably the path Tom suggested would be the way to go.

As the EASA TCDS does not exist, one cannot get a EASA export CofA, which is the reason for that FAA comment.

Without someone there to champion the TCDS, there is no airworthiness supervision being done on the airframe, as the airframe ages, it is only going to get worse. The type was already known for problems with the engine mounts and corrosion.

At the same time I would see no reason why Northrup could not enter into a commercial arrangement with Airbus to take over the FAA TCDS, it would in my view be a significant financial liability for them. I guess Airbus would be more than happy to get rid of it.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-11-08 17:35:56 and read 4697 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 22):
At the same time I would see no reason why Northrup could not enter into a commercial arrangement with Airbus to take over the FAA TCDS, it would in my view be a significant financial liability for them. I guess Airbus would be more than happy to get rid of it.

I'll give you that Zeke...The airframe above would still have a shot if it weren't in the condition its in presently.

Additionally, Tom is right, and to Certify as Exp. would be the way to go anyways.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: TZTriStar500
Posted 2012-11-09 11:16:55 and read 4697 times.

Quoting zeke (Reply 22):
I am not sure about that, from the TCDS "FAA Aircraft Engineering Division, Certification Policy and Procedures Branch AIR-110 is developing a policy for import product surrendered certificates, that will affect eligibility for import". The FAA also only certified a subset of BAC-111s, not all models are eligible in the US. probably the path Tom suggested would be the way to go.

As the EASA TCDS does not exist, one cannot get a EASA export CofA, which is the reason for that FAA comment.

Without someone there to champion the TCDS, there is no airworthiness supervision being done on the airframe, as the airframe ages, it is only going to get worse. The type was already known for problems with the engine mounts and corrosion.

At the same time I would see no reason why Northrup could not enter into a commercial arrangement with Airbus to take over the FAA TCDS, it would in my view be a significant financial liability for them. I guess Airbus would be more than happy to get rid of it.

You are not reading this correctly. The policy focuses on importing and since the US registered aircraft are already here, there is no need for an EASA export CofA. This means no more can be added to the US registry as imports, but those here remain valid as TCDS A5EU still remains valid and was last updated in August 31, 2011. Airbus is still legally obligated to support these on the US registry since the FAA TC is valid until they petition the FAA to surrender the FAA TC. All their doing is trying to limit their obligation to the type without upsetting the owners of those that are left.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-11-09 11:24:51 and read 4843 times.

[quote=BreninTW,reply=4]Did that DC9 go BACK to DL when DL merged with NW or was it retired before the merger?

I think it was retired in 2005, about 5 years before the merger.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: zeke
Posted 2012-11-09 19:26:13 and read 4870 times.

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 24):

It is more than just the aircraft that have been imported, the whole certification was. The FAA did not certify the aircraft, they accepted the foreign TCDS, the FAA TCDS was based upon the UKCAA one.

Airbus has surrendered the TCDS that the FAA one was based on, and have written to the FAA informing them, EASA consider any aircraft without a TCDS to be orphans. EASA say they can therefore only continue to be operated if they hold a restricted certificate of airworthiness or a permit to fly.

How is Airbus responsible for the continued oversight of the design if they surrender the TCDS ?

The BAC111 is different to many modern aircraft where the FAA and EASA have both issued their own TCDS and hence have all the certification data. I do not think the FAA would have all of the certification data for the BAC111, EASA should have that.

I think the FAA is trying to formulate their policy on how to proceed with this.

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: United727
Posted 2013-01-07 17:53:07 and read 3925 times.

Well Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!

GAME ON! I got permission from the owner of the BAC 1-11 in Illinois to be able to work with the aircraft. He's going to attempt to get the flight deck parts that were cannabelized and he says "Have at it!" I requested a WRITTEN DOCUMENT giving a group permission to work with it and should have that in a few weeks, when Rotec Industries CEO returns from a trip to India. Side Note: The plane will NEVER fly again (Due to its cut wings), but it's a jet airliner none the less! This could possibly lead to one of the other four grounded BAC 1-11's to fly again in the US!!!!

Need real help folks...Any players? This is real and I'll gone through the right channels to get the proper permission from the get go.



[Edited 2013-01-07 18:37:47]

Topic: RE: BAC 1-11 Questions?
Username: CanadianNorth
Posted 2013-01-14 09:45:28 and read 3261 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 3):
The repaired DC-9 above is probably the only airliner rebuilt from parts of two aircraft that were both involved in fatal accidents.

There was a 737-200 flying around with Alaska Airlines for a while as N745AS with a similar story. 737-298C (MSN20794/LN346) was built in 1974 for Air Zaire, but in 1985 it had a landing incident which broke its right wing, and it was deemed a right off and parked. Later that year 737-236 MSN22033/LN743 flying for British Airtours had the left engine fail and the aircraft burned down on takeoff in Manchester, but it turned out for the most part the right wing was still perectly fine. The African 737 was rebuilt using the wing from the British Airtours aircraft, and to thicken the plot some of the components (galleys and such) used to return the once parked 737 to service came from 737-297 MSN20209/LN152, of Aloha Airlines 243 fame.


Anyways, sorry for getting off topic again. The BAC 1-11 project sounds really cool, please do keep us a.netters updated on how it goes!


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/