An225 From Israel, joined May 2005, 165 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4555 times:
Hello all,
Sorry if this topic was posted in the past. I couldn't find any when I searched the forum.
I have looked at Sam Chui's picture of the Iran Air B747-SP (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran-Air/Boeing-747SP-86/2168785/L/) and it looks in a very well preserved condition. Looking at Wikipedia it states that other Boeing aircraft are in use, including 727 and 747. Given the more than 30 years long US embargo on Iran this is remarkable that these planes are still flying, not mentioning the SP plane pictured by Sam.
My question is how do the Iranians are able to still keep these birds in the air? especially the SP's which were rare planes to begin with
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16814 posts, RR: 57 Reply 1, posted (7 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4516 times:
Quoting An225 (Thread starter): My question is how do the Iranians are able to still keep these birds in the air? especially the SP's which were rare planes to begin with
I have to imagine: 1) A lot of unapproved repairs (technically, all repairs not done while in contact with the OEM would be unapproved, no?) 2) Machining a lot of parts locally. 3) *Really* good mechanics.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 4, posted (7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4460 times:
Quoting An225 (Thread starter): My question is how do the Iranians are able to still keep these birds in the air?
There are lots of people with Boeing parts that aren't subject to the US embargo...as long as they're willing to sell to the Iranians, they're good. They also must have fantastic mechanics.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1): 1) A lot of unapproved repairs (technically, all repairs not done while in contact with the OEM would be unapproved, no?)
Most repairs are done without contacting the OEM. That's what the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), Component Maintenance Manuals (CMM), and Structural Repair Manual (SRM) are for. Repairs are approved if they meet the requirements of the local regulator...as long as the Iranians are doing whatever the Iranian CAA requires, they're technically covered.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16814 posts, RR: 57 Reply 5, posted (7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4454 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4): Most repairs are done without contacting the OEM. That's what the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), Component Maintenance Manuals (CMM), and Structural Repair Manual (SRM) are for. Repairs are approved if they meet the requirements of the local regulator...as long as the Iranians are doing whatever the Iranian CAA requires, they're technically covered.
Then what is the brouhaha about IR acquiring 743's without Boeing having updated the manuals?
tom355uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (7 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4350 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5): Then what is the brouhaha about IR acquiring 743's without Boeing having updated the manuals?
Because if the manual being used is not the most up to date version, then technically I don't think it is meant to be used. For all intents and purposes, most of the information will be the same but there may be certain AD's and procedure changes that are not implemented or described in older versions.
soon7x7 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 2798 posts, RR: 14 Reply 8, posted (7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4301 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4): Repairs are approved if they meet the requirements of the local regulator...as long as the Iranians are doing whatever the Iranian CAA requires, they're technically covered.
Are they not then restricted from US airspace as a result of questionable maintenance practices?...The UN general assembly makes exception to this?. They probably operate the same way "Tower Air" used to...they would purchase some timed out equipment from out west and cannibalize the airframes for parts. Bone-yards are now a global reality so the availability of parts worldwide is still fairly robust.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6145 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (7 months 2 weeks ago) and read 4235 times:
Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 8): The UN general assembly makes exception to this?.
Diplomatic flights by heads of state are exempt from a lot of rules that apply to commercial airlines, or private aircraft.
Such as the Tu-114 that flew into Andrews AFB in Sept 1959 with Nikita Khrushchev - that certainly wasn't an aircraft or airline 'certified' in the US.
The only reason the Iran aircraft is allowed into the US is that it is a diplomatic aircraft. The maintenance history of the aircraft, or lack of, has no bearing on the decision.
Because the United Nations is headquartered in New York City - a long list of 'enemies' of the United States have been able to fly into the US on UN official business over the past 60+ years.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 10, posted (7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4103 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5): Then what is the brouhaha about IR acquiring 743's without Boeing having updated the manuals?
It all depends on what your OpsSpec says, which depends on your regulator. Most regualators will require that aircraft be maintained per the most Instructions For Continued Airworthiness (ICAs), which the OEM's are obligated to provide. However, for obvious reasons, the Iranian regulators know that Boeing isn't going to be providing them with manual support so there's no reason they'd write that into Iranian's OpsSpec.
Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 8): Are they not then restricted from US airspace as a result of questionable maintenance practices?...The UN general assembly makes exception to this?
Generally not. The existing treaties basically allow the aircraft of a country that's a signatory to the relevant UN treaties to operate in the airspace of any other provided that the aircraft meets the regulations of the *home* country. In other words, an Iranian registered aircraft that's compliant with Iranian regulations is generally allowed to operate in other countries' airspace. However, there are specific country-by-country restrictions (e.g. Cuban aircraft over the US) but those are purely based on politics, not maintenance practices. The EU has an airline blacklist that is based on maintenance practices; a portion, but not all, of Iran's fleet is on the blacklist.
Jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2452 posts, RR: 17 Reply 11, posted (7 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3972 times:
Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 8): Are they not then restricted from US airspace as a result of questionable maintenance practices?
I think this is the saddest side effect from US and UN sanctions policy against Iran. The US declares Iran Air a terrorist organistation because it might have shipped parts for their nuclear programme. So no one can risk trading with Iran Air to supply parts or expertise (they can't even buy fuel in many countries). Then maintenance bacomes a problem and the airline is declared unsafe to operate in US airspace. Meantime flight safety is compromised within Iran too and quite innocent civilians put at risk.
I'm not questioning sanctions in general, but sanctions should not be imposed against civil aviation.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
tod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1682 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (7 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 3958 times:
As stated above, there are plenty of third/fourth party work-arounds.
When I buy parts off of scrapped planes, nobody asks me what plane they are going onto next and if I turned around and sold them again I don't think that I need to know where they are going, just where they've been.
fr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 4246 posts, RR: 12 Reply 13, posted (7 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 3958 times:
Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 11): I'm not questioning sanctions in general, but sanctions should not be imposed against civil aviation.
But, the function of sanctions is to make everyone uncomfortable. Indeed, their function is to hurt everyone in the target nation. The assumption is that if you make the populace uncomfortable enough, the government will capitulate on the issue.
There should be no exceptions to sanctions. Not civil aviation, not medical, not humanitarian...nothing.
Quoting tom355uk (Reply 7): Because if the manual being used is not the most up to date version, then technically I don't think it is meant to be used. For all intents and purposes, most of the information will be the same but there may be certain AD's and procedure changes that are not implemented or described in older versions.
It is reasonable to assume that since they are not getting direct Boeing support, they are not incorporating Service Bulletins and/or Service Letters. Therefore, an updated manual isn't strictly necessary. Yes, Boeing will occasionally change a procedure or limit or parameter or make a correction, but with the marvel we call the Internet, the stuff becomes open source pretty quick.
We all know that AD's should be incorporated within the timetable; and again, with the Internet, getting the information is pretty easy. After that, it's a matter of the engineering department putting together the procedure for incorporation. The sticking point comes from parts (if they are required), that's where 3rd parties come in and/or your own manufacturing.
Jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2452 posts, RR: 17 Reply 14, posted (7 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 3950 times:
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 13): But, the function of sanctions is to make everyone uncomfortable. Indeed, their function is to hurt everyone in the target nation. The assumption is that if you make the populace uncomfortable enough, the government will capitulate on the issue.
There should be no exceptions to sanctions. Not civil aviation, not medical, not humanitarian...nothing.
That may be your opinion, but that's not the policy. Sanctions are specifically targetted against certain areas. Google Iran sanctions and see how specific they are. The aim is to hurt the government, not the civilian population. Even in the case of Iraq this was the case. Humanitarian supplies were allowed. In Iran's case the stated purpose is to stop them developing nuclear technology for weapons, not cause more fatalities in civil aircraft.
As for making the populace uncomfortable, why should a dicatorship care about that? It certainly never bothered Saddam.
[Edited 2012-10-10 07:26:02]
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 15, posted (7 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3867 times:
Quoting fr8mech (Reply 13): It is reasonable to assume that since they are not getting direct Boeing support, they are not incorporating Service Bulletins and/or Service Letters.
Thanks to the Internet, I'm pretty sure they've probably got all the SB's and SL's. I'd be surprised if they aren't incorporating the ones that make sense for them.
9MMPQ From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 243 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (7 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3841 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5): Then what is the brouhaha about IR acquiring 743's without Boeing having updated the manuals?
And to add to everything that has already been said, these were former QF birds. I'd be very surprised if QF would not have had all documentation fully up to date before offloading these aircraft to the next owners.
By the way, I've not heard of these aircraft being in actual service since. Perhaps they've been bought for parts ?
I believe in coincidences. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
faro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1443 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3406 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4): Quoting An225 (Thread starter):
My question is how do the Iranians are able to still keep these birds in the air?
There are lots of people with Boeing parts that aren't subject to the US embargo...as long as they're willing to sell to the Iranians, they're good. They also must have fantastic mechanics.
US persons wishing export to Iran "goods, service and/or technology to insure the safety of civil aviation and safe operation of U.S. origin commercial passenger aircraft" can apply for a specific licence with the Office of Foreign Assets Control in he US:
TWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 755 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (7 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2685 times:
Quoting SXDFC (Reply 23): If Air Koryo ( N.Korea ) can order Russian planes, whats stopping IR? I am also curious as to if IR can order the SSJ-100..
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the SSJ has western avionics. Also, Honeywell, an American company, makes the APU. And also a lot of foreign companies, including companies from the USA, UK, EU, Switzerland, among others have parts in the aircraft. So that would make the SSJ a no-go for IR, until they can get them second hand. Possibly from Armavia?
There's nothing like the smell of Jet-A in the morning. It smells like... VICTORY!!!
25 HAWK21M: Which countries who manufacture aircraft and are not sanctioning Iran?.
27 amccann: I agree that most repairs are done without contacting the OEM however as airplanes age and accumulate damage it becomes much more difficult to perfor
28 HAWK21M: What would Extra carefull mean.....In aviation its doing ones job with attention to safety......which is 100% carefull.....cannot be more detailed...
29 amccann: My statement can obviously be interpreted incorrectly. Of course all aviation/aerospace employees are extra careful, critical of their actions, and s
Sponsor Message: 
From Israel, joined May 2005, 165 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16814 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 336 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1682 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 2011, 243 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, 
From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1443 posts, 
From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2462 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
