D2.3 Report on Previous Retrofits

Transcription

1 D2.3 Report on Previous Retrofits WP / Task N : D2.3 Lead Contractor (deliverable responsible): PARAGON Due date of deliverable: 31/01/2011. Actual submission date: 07/12/2011. Report Period: 6 month 12 month 18 month Period covered: from: Month to: Month Grant Agreement number: Project acronym: RETROFIT Project title: Reduced Emissions of Transport aircraft Operations by Fleetwise Implementation of new Technology Funding Scheme: Support Action Start date of the project: 01/11/2010 Project coordinator name, title and organisation: M. Knegt, Fokker Services Tel: Fax: martin.knegt@fokker.com Project website address: Duration: 16 months PROPRIETARY RIGHTS STATEMENT THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION, WHICH IS PROPRIETARY TO THE RETROFIT CONSORTIUM. NEITHER THIS DOCUMENT NOR THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL BE USED, DUPLICATED OR COMMUNICATED BY ANY MEANS TO ANY THIRD PARTY, IN WHOLE OR IN PARTS, EXCEPT WITH THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE RETROFIT CONSORTIUM THIS RESTRICTION LEGEND SHALL NOT BE ALTERED OR OBLITERATED ON OR FROM THIS DOCUMENT

2 List of authors Full Name Harry Tsahalis Emile Kroon Dave Chilton Auke Nouwens Erik Baalbergen Johan Kos Ad de Graaff Evert Jesse Company Information PARAGON Fokker Services Fokker Services Fokker Services NLR NLR AD Cuenta ADSE Document Information Document Name: Document ID: D2.3 Version: V1.0 Version Date: 07/12/2011 Author: Harry Tsahalis Security: Public Approvals Coordinator Knegt FS WP leader Baalbergen NLR Name Company Date Visa Page 2/102

3 Document history Version Date Modification Authors /08/11 First draft version, submitted to partners for supplements and comments H. Tsahalis /11/11 Second draft version, submitted to partners for supplements and comments H. Tsahalis, D. Chilton /11/ /12/ /12/ /12/ /12/ /12/11 Third draft version, submitted to partners for supplements and comments Fourth draft version, submitted to partners for supplements and comments Fifth draft version, submitted to partners for supplements and comments Sixth draft version, submitted to partners for supplements and comments Update to sixth draft version, submitted to partners for supplements and comments Update to sixth draft version, incorporating comments provided by NLR and Fokker H. Tsahalis H. Tsahalis H. Tsahalis H. Tsahalis H. Tsahalis H. Tsahalis, E.H. Baalbergen, A. Nouwens /12/11 Submitted to RETROFIT WP 2 leader H. Tsahalis /12/11 Submitted to RETROFIT project leader for finalisation E.H. Baalbergen /12/11 Final version A. Nouwens Page 3/102

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION CONTEXT BACKGROUND PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT INTENDED READERSHIP UPGRADES AND RETROFITS TO COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT: PAST, CURRENT AND UNDER DEVELOPMENT AIRCRAFT ENGINES RE-ENGINING - UPGRADES AND RETROFITS AIRCRAFT ENGINES (TURBOFAN): RE-ENGINING - REPLACEMENT AIRCRAFT ENGINES (TURBOFAN): PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT SOLUTIONS AIRCRAFT ENGINES (TURBOPROP): UPGRADE OR AVAILABLE REPLACEMENT AIRCRAFT MODIFICATIONS AND RETROFITS - EXTERIOR AIRFRAME AND COMPONENTS AIRCRAFT MODIFICATIONS AND RETROFITS: AIRCRAFT WITH REAR-MOUNTED ENGINES TURBOPROP AIRCRAFT UPGRADES AND RETROFITS AIRCRAFT MODIFICATIONS AND RETROFITS: AIRCRAFT WITH ENGINES-UNDER-WING CONFIGURATION AIRCRAFT SECURITY & SAFETY SYSTEMS - UPGRADES AND RETROFITS AIRCRAFT SECURITY MONITORING RETROFITS AIRCRAFT SAFETY - DECOMPRESSION INCIDENTS SYSTEMS RETROFITS AIRCRAFT SAFETY - EMERGENCY POWER / LIGHTING SYSTEMS RETROFITS AIRCRAFT SAFETY - FIRE DETECTION, SUPPRESSION, AND PILOT VISION SYSTEMS RETROFITS AIRCRAFT CABINS MODIFICATIONS AND MODERNIZATION AIRCRAFT CABIN LIGHTING RETROFIT - LED LIGHTING AIRCRAFT CABIN ENVIRONMENT IMPROVEMENT RETROFIT AIRCRAFT CABIN IN-SEAT POWER RETROFIT AIRCRAFT CABIN MODERNIZATION PROGRAMMES - AIRFRAME OEMS & VENDORS ADVANCED CABIN MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS RETROFIT AIRCRAFT HEALTH MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS RETROFIT AIRCRAFT MONITORING SYSTEMS - AIRFRAME OEM AND INDEPENDENT SUPPLIER AIRCRAFT AVIONICS RETROFIT FLIGHTDECK-LEVEL RETROFITS FOR AGEING AND OUT-OF-PRODUCTION AIRCRAFT REAL-TIME BLACK BOX INFORMATION TRANSMISSION RETROFIT CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES Page 4/102

5 List of figures and tables Figure / Table Title Figure 1 Re-Engining Programs Compared. Figure 2 Fuel-Burn Improvements: 737, DC10/MD11 and 747. Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Dornier Do228 Next Generation Turboprop. Dornier 228 Turboprop with MT-Propeller MTV-27 Five-Blade Propeller retrofit. Embraer EMB-120 with Pratt and Whitney PW118 turboprop engines. Skywest Airlines Australia Fokker 50 with Pratt and Whitney PW125B turboprop engines with Dowty Rotol six bladed propellers. Douglas DC-9, McDonnell Douglas MD-80 - MD-90, Boeing B717 series aircraft. SUPER98 Douglas DC-9 Drag Reduction Configuration. Figure 9 SUPER98 McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Drag Reduction Configurations (Phase I, Phase II configurations) and Annual Fuel Savings (post drag reduction retrofit). Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 SUPER98 McDonnell Douglas MD-90 Drag Reduction Configuration and Annual Fuel Savings (post drag reduction retrofit). SUPER98 Boeing B717 (MD-95) Drag Reduction Configuration and Annual Fuel Savings (post drag reduction retrofit). Duggan Kinetics McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Modified Thrust Reverser Retrofit kit. Figure 13 Boeing B727. Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 FedEx Boeing B727 Stage 3 Kit Illustration & Configurations data. FedEx B727 Stage 3 Light-weight and Heavy-weight kits configurations data. Raisbeck Engineering Boeing 727 Stage 3 Noise Reduction kit - Raisbeck optimised Leading Edge Slat Configuration (IGW, HGW kits) and External Mixer Tailpipe ( HGW kit). Raisbeck Engineering Boeing 727 Stage 3 Noise Reduction kits technical data. Aircraft Fleet Hushkit Development (Y1999) B727, B737, DC-8 and DC-9. Page 5/102

6 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Hushkit Programs Status and Hushkit Costs (in US $Million) (Y1999). B727 and B737 Hushkit Aircraft Cost and Value Comparisons (Y1999). Quiet Wing Corporation B727s with modifications. Fokker F70 and Fokker F100 series aircraft. XF Series Changes over Fokker 70/100 and XF70 and XF100. Bombardier CRJ200, CRJ700 and CRJ900. SAAB 340 Turboprop aircraft and Saab 340Bplus-WT variant. SAAB 340plus performance (take-off distance required) with / without WT-option. Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Swearingen Aircraft / Fairchild Aircraft SA227-AC Metroliner III Turboprop. Tigerfish Aviation Retracting Float Concept. Cordner Aviation Group BAe 146 Surveyor Combi-freighter. Winglets application examples on Boeing B747 and McDonnell Douglas MD-11 aircraft. Wingtip Fences application examples on various Airbus aircraft models. Figure 32 Raked Wingtips application examples on Boeing B /400 ER and B ER variants. Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Blended Winglet structure and Airplane-level configuration changes for Blended Winglets retrofit to Boeing B Blended Winglets application examples on Boeing B , B , and B Fokker Aerostructures and Fokker Services Winglets Programme timeline (left) and Airbus A320 equipped with large winglets. Airbus A320 equipped with Airbus Sharklets large blended winglets design. Boeing B Adv. Equipped with Quiet Wing Mini-Winglets. AeroTech B737 wing modification. Boeing Short Field Performance test aircraft and GOL Airlines B SFP. Boeing Short Field Performance modification elements. Page 6/102

7 Figure 41 Figure 42 Figure 43 Figure 44 Figure 45 Figure 46 Figure 47 Figure 48 Figure 49 Figure 50 Figure 51 Figure 52 Figure 53 Figure 54 Boeing B737 NG Engine Plug and Nozzle before and after 737 PIP. Boeing B777 PIP Improved Ram Air System. Boeing B777 PIP Drooped Aileron. Boeing B777 PIP Improved Vortex Generators. Carbon Brake Weight Savings. Airbus A300/A310 Family Optimised Air-Vent Inlet NACA Duct. Lufthansa Technik aerosight Cabin Surveillance System. Aircraft Cabin Surveillance Systems Cost Comparison (based on 2004 data). Southwest Airlines B s Hull Failure Incidents: Ruptures near the leading edge of the vertical stabiliser , and slightly aft of the wing (right) FedEx Active Fire Suppression System. EVAS - Emergency Vision Assurance System. Boeing Fire Detection and Suppression Installation - Retrofit examples for B727 and B737 aircraft models. Draw-through Type Smoke Detection and Sensing. Open-area Type Smoke Detection and example configurations on Class C Lower cargo Compartment and on Class E Main deck Cargo compartment. Figure 55 Fokker Services Fire Detection System installation example for Fokker 70 / 100 aircraft models. Figure 56 Fokker LED Lighting system retrofit to Austrian Airlines Fokker aircraft. Figure 57 Fokker Services Cabin Cooling System Retrofit Modifications for the Fokker RECAES and Aircraft Ground Connection. Figure 58 Figure 59 Figure 60 Figure 61 Illustrations of fundamental Active Noise Control principal and representation of cabin noise mapping with and without AVNC system operation. EmPower In-Seat Power Supply and Inflight Power With Integrated Seat Power systems KID-SYSTEME SKYpower In-seat Power Supply system Boeing Sky Interior Cabin B737 Upgrade package. Page 7/102

8 Figure 62 Figure 63 Figure 64 Figure 65 Figure 66 Figure 67 Figure 68 Figure 69 Figure 70 Figure 71 Airbus SPICE Galley concept. ATR-600 series, ATR , ATR Turboprops. ARMONIA Cabin Interior for ATR-600 series and ATR (linefit or retrofit). Star Alliance B/E Aerospace common long-haul economy seat. Rockwell Collins Venue Cabin Remote App for ipod touch, iphone, ipad. Flight Displays Systems Select CMS Archos 7 tablet with Android CMS software Lufthansa Technik nice HD modular and flexible Ethernet (IP) based Cabin Management and In-flight Entertainment system. Example Boeing - Fujitsu Automated Identification Technology (AIT) options for Life-jackets - RFID tags and Structural Rotables - Contact Memory Buttons. Summary characteristics of Wireless Avionics Intra Communications. Basic Automated Flight Information Reporting System (AFIRS) components. Figure 72 AFIRS Aircraft Certification Status as of September Figure 73 AFIRS Aircraft under Contract as of September Figure 74 Figure 75 Airborne Maintenance and Engineering Services DC-9 NextGen compatible Flightdeck Retrofit. Bombardier Dash and Dash series turboprop aircraft. Page 8/102

9 Glossary Acronym Signification AC Alternating Current AU Australia ACARS Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System ACMS Aircraft Condition Monitoring System ADS Airborne Data Service AEW&C Airborne Early Warning and Control AFIRS Automated Flight Information Reporting System AHEAD Aircraft Health Analysis and Diagnostics AHM Air Health Management AIT Automated Identification Technology ANA All Nippon Airways ANC Active Noise Control APU Auxiliary Power Unit ARINC Aeronautical Radio, Incorporated - Application-specific standard for aircraft avionics ARJ Advanced Regional Jet ASANCA Advanced Study for Active Noise Control in Aircraft ATC Air Traffic Control ATR Aerei da Trasporto Regionale / Avions de Transport Régional AVC Active Vibration Control AVNC Active Vibration & Noise Control AVSI Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute BE Belgium BR Brazil BAe British Aerospace CG Centre of Gravity CH Switzerland CN China CAN Canada CFM CFM International (General Electric, Snecma) CMC Central Maintenance Computer CMO Component Management Optimisation CMS Cabin Management System COMAC Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd Page 9/102

10 COTS CPIP CRJ db DE DFDAU DHC EP ER ES EFB EGPWS E-Jets EMI EVAS FR ft FAA FADEC FDR FedEx FMS GE Gallon GEnx HGW HUD ID IN -in IP IS IT IAE ICAO Commercial Off-The-Shelf Cruise Performance Improvement Program Canadair Regional Jet decibel Deutschland (Germany) Digital Flight Data Acquisition Unit de Havilland Canada Enhanced Performance Extended Range Spain Electronic Flight Bag Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System Embraer-Jets Electro-Magnetic-Interference Emergency Vision Assurance System France (Unit: 1 ft. = meters) Federal Aviation Administration Full Authority Digital Engine Control Flight Data Recorder Federal Express Flight Management System General Electric (Unit: 1 US gallon = liters) General Electric Next-generation Heavy Gross Weight Head-Up Display Indonesia India (Unit: 1 inch = 2.54 centimetres) Internet Protocol Iceland Italy International Aero Engines (Pratt and Whitney, Roll-Royce, MTU Aero Engines, Japanese Aero Engine Corporation) International Civil Aviation Organization Page 10/102

11 IFE In-Flight Entertainment IFEC In-Flight Entertainment and Communication IGW Increased Gross Weight ISMS In-flight Safety Monitoring System ITU-R ITU Radiocommunication Sector JP Japan KW Kuwait KLM KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V.) lbs. (Unit: 1 kilogram = lbs) LR Long Range LAN Local Area Network LCD Liquid Crystal Display LED Light-Emitting Diode LPV Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance MGTOW Maximum Gross Takeoff Weight mile (Unit: 1 mile = meters) MLW Maximum Landing Weight MTOW Maximum Take Off Weight NG Next Generation NL The Netherlands Nm Nautical Miles (Unit: 1 nautical mile = kilometers) NextGen Next Generation Air Transportation System NiCd Nickel cadmium OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer OEW Operating Empty Weight PIP Performance Improvement Package RAPT Retractable Amphibious Pontoon RECAES Rear Cabin Air Extraction System RFID Radio-Frequency IDentification RVSM Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum SE Sweden SI Slovenia SPICE SPace Innovative Catering Equipment SESAR Single European Sky ATM Research SFP Short Field Performance STC Supplemental Type Certificate Page 11/102

12 TN TR TAWS TCAS UA UK UAE UPS USA USB USD Vnav WAAS WAIC WEPPS Tunisia Turkey Terrain Awareness and Warning System Traffic Collision Avoidance System Ukraine United Kingdom United Arab Emirates United Parcel Service United States of America Universal Serial Bus United States Dollars Vertical Navigation Wide Area Augmentation System Wireless Avionics Intra Communications Wireless Emergency Primary Power Systems Page 12/102

13 1 Introduction 1.1 Context The RETROFIT project analyses the possibilities and attractiveness of retrofitting new technical solutions into the large existing fleet of commercial airliners. A new generation of airliners is only at the horizon. Existing aircraft still have a long life to serve, whereas the operational environment is changing. Airlines are confronted with emission trading limits, new noise rules, increasing fuel prices, new safety and security demands, new ATM environment where older aircraft cannot comply with the new ATM standards, and passenger expectations to enjoy the highest levels of comfort possible. The project first addresses the stakeholder requirements and investigates current and future technology options to retrofit existing aircraft. Next, it addresses the need to perform additional research to make retrofits attractive as well as the question if specific research activities should be integrated in the EC framework programs. It also makes a cost benefit analysis based on existing airline fleets and potential applications of new technical solutions. Finally, it assesses retrofitting which new technologies to which airplanes, and makes an assessment of funding mechanisms for promising business cases. The results of the project will be widely disseminated. Promising cases can lead to a substantial economic activity in many European countries. Details on the project and the applied definition of retrofit are given in Retrofit-D11 [1]. 1.2 Background The European aeronautical industries and their supply chains, the research centres, and the universities are continuously developing, integrating and validating new technologies and processes in order to ensure industrial competitiveness in answering the needs of its customers and of the European society. The aeronautical Research and Technology Development (RTD) mainly focuses on developments of technologies and processes that will finally be applied in the development of new aircraft and engines or derivatives of existing aircraft and engines. Aeronautical research and technology development is stimulated already for many years by the European Commission through Framework Programmes. The Transport Programme in the 6th and 7th Framework funds a large number of RTD projects addressing the need for more environmentally friendly, passenger friendly, and cost effective air transport, involving both small and targeted (i.e., level 1) projects and integrated (i.e., level 2) projects. In addition, the public-private joint technology initiatives Clean Sky and SESAR have started. In addition to the European funded projects, national programmes in the member states are also stimulating the RTD of aeronautical technologies and processes. The development of new technologies and processes in RTD programmes however is generally not focusing on retrofits. The benefits of the new technologies and processes are aimed at newly developed aircraft, whereas the fleet-wise application of the new technologies and processes through retrofits would allow to obtain societal and economic Page 13/102

14 benefits earlier and on a much larger scale, since a large portion of the future transport fleet will still consist of aircraft in service today. The project, and in particular work package 2, addresses the opportunities for retrofitting that existing and new technologies offer. As a first step an inventory, or initial long list, of potential technologies for application in retrofit programmes was set up in Retrofit-D21 [2]. The inventory includes RTD results obtained in the 6th and 7th EU Framework Programmes and in several national programmes, as well as inputs from experts in the relevant technology areas. The list was further developed based on interviews in Retrofit- D12 [3] and a workshop with stakeholders in Retrofit-D13D24 [4]. 1.3 Purpose of this document This document contains the results of the investigation into the experiences with previous (and more current) retrofit programs in order to give insight to retrofit solutions and their application to aircraft, and to identify where possible any critical success factors for retrofit programmes in general. The scope of the investigation is intended to cover a suitable range and variety of retrofit technologies to aircraft as best supported by the type and details contained in literature found. The purpose of the investigation was to obtain to the extent possible insight to the factors and conditions that impact the decisions for conducting retrofit activities, in particular for fleet-wide retrofit initiatives. Identification and investigation into previous retrofit programmes is based solely on free literature found on the internet. It was found that meaningful results of retrofit programmes (e.g., implementation costs, logistics, operational benefits), whether successful or not, are not made publicly available. The majority of such programmes are (not including retrofits mandated by authorities) either conducted in-house by an airline or OEM, or are a result of private ventures between airline(s) and the retrofit solution provider, and in either case the use and/or exchange of confidential information is involved. In addition, the RETROFIT project did not have sufficient financial resources to purchase and consult expensive reports from studies conducted for specific retrofit market segments. Despite the limitations encountered, the results of the study do lend support to the objectives of the study. Overall findings in this report are also input to Retrofit Task 2.4 Synthesis. 1.4 About this document The findings of the investigation into the experiences with previous retrofit programs have been extended to include also current references to retrofit initiatives found until the month of completion (November 2011). Additionally, it has been identified that there are several potential technology retrofits under development that are either very close to actual implementation (beyond the timeframe of the Retrofit project) or that have an implementation timeline that is dependent more upon current lack of agreed regulation for deployment rather than technology maturity. References to such retrofits are also included for completeness. Findings of the investigation are categorized under six broad application domain areas in Chapter 2: Page 14/102

15 - Aircraft Engines Re-Engining, covering aircraft re-engining and aircraft engines improvement cases for turbofan and turboprop aircraft. - Aircraft Modifications and Retrofits, covering aircraft external modifications and upgrades of mainly aerodynamic and structural nature for aircraft performance improvement and extension of aircraft life. - Aircraft Security and Safety Systems, covering retrofits for aircraft safety systems and security monitoring. - Aircraft Cabins Modifications and Modernization, covering retrofit solutions and cases for aircraft cabin environment, modernization, and management. - Aircraft Health Monitoring and Management, covering indicative cases of developed and retrofitted aircraft health monitoring systems. - Aircraft Avionics Retrofit (covering mainly select cases of aircraft flightdeck retrofits to ageing and/or out-of-production aircraft. Chapter 3 summarizes the conclusions on the status of retrofit activities on a general level, and also lists the potential retrofit areas for which there is potential need and growth in the interim. 1.5 Intended readership This report is targeted towards the European Commission, and serves to give quick insight on status and potential range of aircraft retrofit activities and uptake. Page 15/102

16 2 Upgrades and Retrofits to Commercial Aircraft: Past, Current and Under Development Findings of the investigation have been categorized under six broad retrofit application domain areas. Specifically: - Aircraft Engines Re-Engining, covering aircraft re-engining and aircraft engines improvement cases for turbofan and turboprop aircraft, in section Aircraft Modifications and Retrofits, covering aircraft external modifications and upgrades of mainly aerodynamic and structural nature for aircraft performance improvement and extension of aircraft life, in section Aircraft Security and Safety Systems, covering retrofits for aircraft safety systems and security monitoring, in section Aircraft Cabins Modifications and Modernization, covering retrofit solutions and cases for aircraft cabin environment, modernization, and management, in section Aircraft Health Monitoring and Management, covering indicative cases of developed and retrofitted aircraft health monitoring systems, in section Aircraft Avionics Retrofit (covering mainly select cases of aircraft flightdeck retrofits to ageing and/or out-of-production aircraft), in section Aircraft Engines Re-engining - Upgrades and Retrofits This section addresses and includes references to Aircraft re-engining cases projects and Aircraft engine performance improvement kits/packages that are developed by engine OEMs which are available for upgrade of in-service aircraft engines. With respect to the term of re-engining, this is taken to mean either one of two types of activity. This may be either the replacement of engines on an existing aircraft with newer version engines, or the replacement of engines on an existing aircraft design/model that is introduced (by the airframe OEM) as a next evolution version of the same aircraft model. In the latter case these activities are conducted primarily by the airframe OEMs or at the least (but not common) by organizations that are owned by an airframe OEM or in a commercial cooperation with said OEM organization that allows access to proprietary aircraft information. In both cases extensive engineering and structural modifications are to be expected. The main difference between the two types of activity lies in the level of modification required to the aircraft for the newer engines to be integrated. In the first case this type of project is executed mainly within the inherent constraints and penalties of the specific airframe design and its relative components, i.e., with respect to the airframe segment where the engines are mounted (either under-wing or rear-fuselage), penalties on the airframe - required structural modifications and/or re-enforcement to accommodate the newer engine characteristics (weight, loading, etc consideration). In the latter case the impact of the physical characteristics of the newer engines to be incorporated mandate major re-design and replacement of critical sections of the aircraft design in question (primarily the wings), that can be only introduced in the manufacturing phase of the aircraft. Page 16/102

17 The choice to either re-engine or upgrade in-service aircraft engines depends primarily on the trade-off result of a long list of factors, that include cost of acquisition of replacement engines or upgrade kits, down-time (time to conversion) and any increases in maintenance requirements and costs vs. substantiated increase per on-wing life (of the engines), decrease in the number of shop visits, impact of the changes on the residual value of the aircraft, and reduction in fuel costs through increased fuel-burn performance Aircraft Engines (Turbofan): Re-Engining - Replacement In so far as re-engining projects are concerned, many cases have occurred, yet detailed technical and moreover financial information (project cost, benefits achieved) per these projects is limited or none (which is expected as such data would include proprietary confidential information). The majority of identified re-engining projects were conducted in the past, and in some cases undertaken on aircraft types / models of that are currently out of production. Several brief references identified per specific aircraft type / models are provided in following [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]: Boeing B707 Re-engining of B variants of Qantas (AU) and American Airlines (USA), replacing the existing Pratt and Whitney JT3C (turbojet engines) with the then new type turbofan-technology engines, the Pratt and Whitney JT3D. Although the Boeing B707 (introduced in the 1950 s) has been out-of-production for many years and phased out of the fleets of many of the former operators of the type, this aircraft is still the subject of retrofits in the current day. An additional case of interest identified refers to a potential new re-engining case for the Boeing B707 (announced in 2011) via the recent certification by Pratt and Whitney of a number of enhancements developed for the Pratt and Whitney JT8D-219 engine. The upgraded engine will be offered by Pratt and Whitney to the partner of this joint venture, Seven Q Seven (USA), to support via STC its Boeing B707 upgrade and conversion business for commercial and military missions. The list of improvements developed by Pratt and Whitney for upgrade of the JT8D-219 engine comprises of a nickel high-pressure compressor rotor system (enhanced resistance to corrosion), enhanced bleed override system, higher load-carrying powershaft and gearbox elements (increased power extraction), as also external changes addressing the mounting of the engine under the wing. Douglas Aircraft Company DC-8 Re-engining of the DC-8 equipped with the Pratt and Whitney JT3D engine, due to the introduction of more stringent noise regulations (1970 s). A number of DC-8 aircraft (mainly cargo conversions) were re-engined with the CFM56 engine offered by CFM. In the same category UPS (USA) re-engined a number of their Boeing aircraft, equipped with the Pratt and Whitney JT8D, with Rolls-Royce Tay engines. McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Specifically for the model DC-10-30ER (Extended Range), a derivative of the DC model, one of the new features offered (amongst a list of improvements) was the Page 17/102

18 introduction of a specific variant of the GE manufactured CF6-6 family of turbofan engines (that powered other DC-10 series), the CF6-50C2B. Of note here is that a customer for the DC-10-30ER, namely Swissair (CH), along with its purchase of two such aircraft also ordered retrofit kits in order to convert two of its already operational DC s to the DC-10-30ER configuration. McDonnell Douglas MD-80 / MD-90 Further to the introduction and use of the Pratt and Whitney JT8D (for the Douglas Aircraft Company DC-9), McDonnell Douglas introduced a higher-bypass version of this engine into the development and introduction of the MD-80, and in following (evolution of the MD-80) moved from Pratt and Whitney engines offering to the V2500 engine offered by IAE. Boeing B737 Per the introduction of the newer B737-Classic version by Boeing, engines used on the prior B737 versions (Pratt and Whitney JT8D), were replaced with CFM56 engines (CFM). Airbus A340 Per the introduction of the larger -500/600 variants of the A340 series (with revised larger wing), the engine offering of previous variants, the CFM56 engine (CFM), were replaced with Rolls-Royce Trent engines. A summary of technical comparisons of selected re-engining programs over a time period spanning the 1980 s to the mid-1990 s, as also figures per improvement in performance resultant of the re-engining activities, are provided [6]: Figure 1: Re-Engining Programs Compared [6]. Page 18/102

19 Figure 2: Fuel-Burn Improvements: 737, DC10/MD11, and 747 [6] Aircraft Engines (Turbofan): Performance Improvement Solutions The alternative option to re-engining is the upgrade of current (models) and in-service engines, and engine performance improvements (improved fuel efficiency, extension of time on wing, maintenance costs, reduction in noise emissions, etc) are accomplished via modification and/or replacement of selected engine components and subsystems, as also modifications applied to engine nacelles. Such solutions are developed and provided by engine OEMs and specialist companies related to the airframe OEM (i.e., engine nacelles), and their development are not always necessarily linked to new aircraft development programmes. A listing of cases for engine performance improvements or programmes/packages available by engine OEMs for upgrade or retrofit are provided in following. These are categorized according to whether the offering in question is either for engines by standalone engine OEMs or by alliances of engine OEMs, i.e., CFM (USA, FR), IAE (USA/CAN, UK, DE, and JP). CFM series engines o CFM56-7BE: The CFM56-7BE Evolution engine configuration [10], available via retrofit and also now standard for the Boeing B737 NG. The main modifications address components of the high pressure turbine (revised forward outer seal, guide vane diffuser, blades, and disc) and low pressure turbine (revised blades, vanes, discs and case). The reported improvements in performance to be realized by the Evolution engine configuration include reduction in maintenance costs (4%) and fuel burn (1%). It is offered as part of the B737 PIP (that includes drag reduction improvements), and delivery of the first B737 NG fitted with the new engine configuration took place in July o CFM56-5B/3: The performance improvement elements of the Evolution engine configuration will also be made available for the Airbus A320 [11], and is envisaged Page 19/102

20 to become standard on the A320's CFM56-5B/3 engine once introduced and also available as retrofit during engine overhaul. The reported improvements in performance to be realized include reduction in maintenance costs (1%) and fuel burn (0.5%). According to press [7] the airline Thomas Cook (UK) has selected such a performance improvement package for its on order CFM56-5B equipped Airbus A321s due to be delivered in o CFM56-3: A performance improvement upgrade is also available for the CFM56-3 engine, offered by GE, and has been adopted by airlines such as KLM (NL) and Continental Airlines (USA) [12]. The performance upgrade package includes improved high pressure turbine blades and compressors, and the reduction in fuel burn is approximately 1%. According to the information available, the upgrade can be implemented by airlines either as a whole package or per singular elements (i.e., the upgraded compressors). It is estimated that full package upgrades conducted account for 20% of CFM56-3 engines while upgrades to the compressors (only) account for 5% to 10%. IAE series engines o V2500: The IAE V2500 SelectOne engine configuration and upgrade, applicable as retrofit to the IAE V2500-A5 engine [13]. The new configuration is designed to decrease fuel burn (1%) and increase engine time-on-wing (20%), as also reduce maintenance visits by up to 40%. The first retrofit of the V2500 SelectOne upgrade offering was achieved by Pratt and Whitney on an aircraft of US Airways (USA) equipped with 11-year old V2500-A5 engines [14]. The V2500 SelectOne upgrade has been selected by numerous airlines for upgrade of their IAE V2500 equipped Airbus A320s, some examples including [13] [15] [16] by Sichuan Airlines (CN), IndiGo (IN), upgrade of 3 V2500 equipped Airbus A320 s of Adria, Airways (SI), 26 Airbus A320 s of Mexicana Airlines (MX), and also for Etihad Airways (UAE) whereas 30 Airbus A320s equipped with V2500 engines will be upgraded to the SelectOne configuration (to be conducted during engine overhauls). Pratt and Whitney series engines o PW4000: In 1993, Pratt and Whitney certified an enhancement package, termed as Phase III, developed for its PW4000 turbofan engine (specific development addressing improvement of thrust specific fuel consumption for 50,000 to 62,000 pound thrust class engines). According to tests carried out and statement by Pratt and Whitney [17] the enhancement package achieved a 3.1% improvement in thrust specific fuel consumption for the engine in question, and benefits to be had for example referring to potential operators of McDonnell Douglas MD-11 s, is that the achieved reduction in thrust specific fuel consumption could lead up to $300,000 annual fuel saving per aircraft. Reported improvements included in the enhancement package range from improved fan blade, improvement of the high pressure turbine airfoils (materials, coating, cooling), improved low turbine aerodynamics, reduced leakage fan case, and enhanced full-authority digital electronic control capabilities for optimization of turbine case cooling. For upgrade retrofit of PW4000 engines on McDonnell Douglas and Airbus aircraft, Pratt and Whitney provides the provides the entire propulsion system together with an Page 20/102

21 improved nacelle featuring enhanced nozzle performance and thrust reverser sealing improvements. Rolls-Royce series engines o Trent 900: Rolls-Royce is in the development phase for an Enhanced Performance (EP) version and kit for its Trent 900 engine (this engine model powers the Airbus A380) [18], citing that the under development engine improvement aims at retaining the competitiveness of this engine for the aforementioned Airbus aircraft vs. the rival engine GP7200 offered by CFM. Offered in an analogous manner to the Trent 700EP kit by Roll-Royce (this engine powers the Airbus A330), the Trent 900EP will be made available as an upgrade kit (and standard on all new Trent 900 s from Y2011). The full installation of all the optional parts of the Trent 900EP will yield (reportedly) 1% reduction in fuel burn. This undertaking is of interest to note in consideration that it is specified that the Trent 900EP kit development will draw performance enhancement technology and elements from both the Trent 700EP and the Trent 1000 engines. Reported proposed elements of the Trent 900EP package range from the introduction of elliptical leading-edge modifications throughout the entire compression system, including the introduction of improved blades and vanes for the high- and intermediate-pressure compressor. The modifications also extend to the fan and outlet guide vanes. Changes will also be made to the air management system o Trent 1000: The Trent 1000 engine by Rolls-Royce was developed for the new Boeing B787. Per the manufacturing and deliveries of B787 s ordered with this engine option, Rolls-Royce has also progressed to the development of a performance enhancement package that is currently undergoing testing on production B787 aircraft [19] [20]. Termed as the Trent 1000 Package B (thus the previous original Trent 1000 version is termed - Package A), the package includes a range of enhancements ranging from revised six-stage low pressure turbine design, relocation of the intermediate-pressure compressor bleed off take ports, high-aspect-ratio blades, and revised fan outlet guide vanes with improved aerodynamics. General Electric series engines o GE90: The GE90 PIP was developed by GE for the GE90 engine that powers the Boeing B777 long range wide-body aircraft [21]. The developed PIP kit is reported to incorporate a range of improvements such as to the high pressure compressor (advanced 3-D aerodynamic components), new sealing, clearance and turbine technology. The operational performance improvements and benefits per application of the PIP kit to the GE90 include a 1.6 percent reduction in fuel burn, reduction in maintenance costs, and higher payload capability. In so far as the uptake of this PIP kit is concerned, one example of adoption and retrofit is by Kuwait Airlines (KW), through a US$ 11 million deal with Boeing to upgrade 5 of their long-haul GE90-90B equipped B777 s with the aforementioned upgrade kit. o GEnx: The GEnx series engines, developed by GE are for the new Boeing B787 and the latest edition of the Boeing B747 series, the B Specifically, GE Page 21/102

22 certified its PIP1 kit for the GEnx-1B turbofan engine for the B787 [22] [23] in It is also reported that GE is currently in progress of developing the PIP2 kit for the same engine, to be introduced in For the Boeing B747-8, GE is in the process of developing the PIP2 kit for the GEnx-2B67 engines that power the B747-8 [24]. In the case of the PIP2 the reported upgrades include aerodynamic improvements to the high pressure compressor and are planned for entry into service in o CF34-3A2: GE Aviation initiated development in 2010 [25] of a new on-wing engine performance upgrade programme for select configurations of the GE CF34-3A2 turbofan engine. The development programme aims to enable users of this engine (the select configurations) to transition from hard-time maintenance to an oncondition maintenance schedule, and thereby reduce maintenance costs and increase aircraft residual value. The GE CF34 engine development was derivative from the GE TF34 military engine [26], and is used on various regional aircraft models, such as on the Bombardier CRJ aircraft series and the Embraer E-Jets aircraft series. The upgrade programme is reported to comprise of replacement of the engine s current honeycomb shrouds (high-pressure turbine) and combustor liner, with advanced steel shrouds and new combuster liner of increased durability respectively. The engine upgrade offering also includes the addition of a borescope port Aircraft Engines (Turboprop): Upgrade or Available Replacement With respect to engines upgrades or re-engining for turboprops, cases where this has occurred are far less than that for turbofan equipped aircraft. Although cases and solutions exist, the issue in this particular segment of the aircraft market is the decline in the demand for turboprops since the mid-end 1990 s vs. then regional turbofan-equipped aircraft. Following the turn of the decade many turboprop manufacturers ceased productions (e.g., Saab (SE), Dornier (DE), Fokker (NL), Embraer (BR), Fairchild (USA), etc) leaving nowadays only two major global western turboprop manufacturers, namely ATR (FR, IT) and Bombardier (CAN). Several examples below have been identified per either recent or past known turboprop engine upgrades, retrofits, or the existence of revised variants of older turboprop engines that are available for retrofit. Turboprop Engine Propellers Retrofit An interesting, and recent case of engine upgrade with respect to turboprop aircraft, involves the revival of the Dornier 228 turboprop by Ruag Aerospace (CH), the Dornier 228NG [27] [28]. According to source, in September 2008 Ruag Aerospace in cooperation with MT- Propeller (DE) [29] completed a five-day flight program to test a new five-blade propeller for the Dornier 228NG (to be continued through to November of that year), with improved operational (cruise performance enhanced by 2-3 knots, quicker engine start, etc, noise, vibration and anti-corrosion performance, and 80 lbs weight reduction improvement vs. the original propeller weight). Page 22/102

23 Figure 2: Dornier 228 Next Generation Twin- Turboprop [27]. Figure 3: Dornier 228 Turboprop with MT-Propeller MTV- 27 Five-blade propeller retrofits [29]. Furthermore it is stated that that this new propeller can be retrofitted to older in-service Dornier 228 turboprop aircraft, i.e. the Do , and-200 series (ex the -212 variant). Turboprop Alternative Engines and Retrofits o Rolls-Royce AE 2100A A derivative of the 1107C-Liberty turboshaft engine (made by the Allison Engine Company (USA) - currently part of Rolls-Royce North America), the AE 2100 turboprop engine [30] [31] is applicable to a range of high speed regional aircraft (50-70 seat capacity) and military aircraft (e.g., the Lockheed Martin (USA) C-130J Hercules, the Alenia C-27J Spartan (IT), the Saab 2000 AEW&C (SE) and others). As this variant of the AE turboprop family (-A designation for civilian use) is stated to have key common features with the Rolls-Royce T56 turboprop engine, i.e., identical physical fits, common thrust centrelines and mounts, the AE 2100A turboprop may be retrofitted to all aircraft equipped with the T56 turboprop engine. o Pratt and Whitney PW118A / Embraer 120 Twin-Turboprop The PW118A turboprop [32], one of the early variants of the Pratt and Whitney PW100 turboprop series [33], was developed as an up-rated version of the original turboprop engine of the series that equipped the Embraer EMB 120, namely the PW115. The PW118A is cited as being available as retrofit for the Embraer EMB 120 turboprop aircraft. Page 23/102

24 Figure 4: Embraer EMB-120 Twin-Turboprop with Pratt and Whitney PW118 turboprop engines [34a]. o Pratt and Whitney PW121 and PW150 / Bombardier Q-series Twin-Turboprops (Q100/200/300) In 1992, de Havilland (CAN) (now Bombardier) announced the development of several upgrade variants of its DHC-8 series turboprop aircraft termed as "B" models (the DHC-8-100/200/300 series, otherwise now known as the Bombardier Q100/200/300 series) [32] [34]. The upgraded variants would provide amongst other benefits longer range and higher gross weights. The B variants of the Q100, Q200, Q300 were to be equipped with variants of the Pratt and Whitney PW100 turboprop series, specifically the models PW121 and PW123B, for the Q100 and the Q200/Q300 models respectively. For the Bombardier Q200 and Q300 it is cited that most of the B package options are applicable for retrofit. o Pratt and Whitney PW127 / Fokker F50 Twin-Turboprop This particular case refers to still in use civilian Fokker 50 turboprop aircraft [35]. The Fokker 50 is a now out-of-production turboprop developed and manufactured by Fokker (NL) back in the mid-1980 s, as successor to the successful Fokker F27 Friendship [36]. Fokker 50 s are still operated by airlines today such as in the case the regional airline Skywest (AU), and the specific Fokker aircraft type comprise part of a larger Fokker aircraft fleet operated by the airline (combination Fokker 50 turboprops and Fokker 100 turbofan aircraft). The reference here addresses the existence of an enhanced version of the Fokker 50, whereas further to the Fokker 50 s equipped with the Pratt and Whitney PW125B turboprop engine (a variant of the Pratt and Whitney PW100 turboprop series), the cited enhanced version of the Fokker 50 s operated are equipped with a latter (to the PW125B) improved variant of the PW100 turboprop series, namely the PW127B. Both aforementioned variants of the Pratt and Whitney PW100 turboprop series are fitted with six-bladed Dowty-Rotol (UK) propellers. Page 24/102

25 Figure 5: Skywest Airlines Australia Fokker F50 Twin-Turboprop with Pratt and Whitney PW125B turboprop engines and Dowty Rotol Six-blade propellers [37]. 2.2 Aircraft Modifications and Retrofits - Exterior Airframe and Components This section addresses and includes references to modifications, upgrades and retrofit cases and solutions applicable to the exterior of aircraft or changes to aircraft that may require subsequent revisions to aircraft exterior elements, and covers items such as structures, components and/or add-on solutions. Many of the cases refer to aerodynamic improvements and also range performance improvements, but also included are references per singular non-aerodynamic related improvements. Cases included refer to aircraft in-service and entries are categorized not by type modification, but by applicable aircraft types (mission), type of propulsion (configuration), and aircraft build. This section is divided mainly between regional commercial aircraft, with engines mounted to the rear of the fuselage, turboprops, and regional and long-haul commercial aircraft, with engines mounted under-wing. As these types of modifications are amongst those that are the most complex technically and financially, what may be available via public information search means is not what one would originally expect, either from a detailed information point of view or per number of explicit references to such (modifications). Albeit these constraints, a fair number of past, and more importantly, current aircraft modification cases have been identified. These exclude cases applied to general and business aviation dedicated or designated aircraft, except in some references that may be included that refer to unique upgrades and modifications Aircraft Modifications and Retrofits: Aircraft with Rear-mounted Engines Included here are references for upgrades and retrofits of aircraft with rear-mounted engines aircraft, such as from (former) airframe OEMs McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing), Fokker, and long-time discontinued aircraft models manufactured by Boeing (e.g., B717, B727). The following listings for past or under development retrofits is by no means meant to be complete and exhaustive, in so far as to covering all possible airframe OEMs and individual aircraft models and respective variants. Extensive references to cited aircraft models histories and individual variants characteristics are not made here as these are not of the scope of this document. Short descriptions, that may or may not include features of distinction, are provided merely for the purpose of providing a base of reference to subsequent information concerning the upgrades and retrofit options (e.g., Page 25/102

26 aerodynamic, structural changes, external elements). In addition separate references to engine modifications and upgrades here rather than in Section 2.1 concern unique past exterior modifications or upgrades that are currently considered out-dated, e.g., aircraft engines hush-kits Douglas Aircraft Company DC-series, McDonnell Douglas MD-series and Boeing B717, B727 -series aircraft The Douglas Aircraft Company DC-9, initially manufactured in the mid-1960 s and delivered till the beginning of the 1980 s, is a T-tailed twin-engine single-aisle short-tomedium range airliner [38], designed to land at airports with shorter runways and less infrastructure. The following models, i.e., the McDonnell Douglas MD-80 and 90 [39] [40], and the Boeing B717 [41], were subsequent modifications (to the original design) of the DC-9 (produced in five variants), and approximately 2500 units were built until the last of the B717 s were delivered in the mid-2000 s (2006). The MD-80 model was essentially a stretched version of the DC-9 (specifically of the last - 50 variant) with main differences being higher fuel capacity, MTOW (Maximum Take-Off Weight), several engine variant offerings (Pratt and Whitney JT8D) and new main landing gear. The MD-90 (early 1990 s) was a stretched derivative of the predecessor MD-80 that came with glass cockpit (originally featured in one of the MD-80 variants) and with the then new IAE V2500 high-bypass turbofan engine. The last model bringing this aircraft line to a close was the MD-95, marketed though as the Boeing B717. The distinctive features of the last model, further than being closer (in design) to the DC-9 (i.e., -30 variant) rather than the precursor MD-80/90 models was the extensive use and incorporation of more modern and lighter materials. It was supplied with high bypass turbofan engines, but from another engine OEM than IAE (i.e., the Rolls-Royce BR715). Although all aforementioned aircraft models are no longer in production, the baseline aircraft design with its unique operational and performance features is still in use today, in the form of the new ARJ21 built by COMAC (CN). Figure 6: Douglas DC-9, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, MD-90, and Boeing B717 series aircraft (left to right) [38] [39] [40] [41]. The reported retrofit kits (developed or under development) for this broad out-ofproduction aircraft series, to be available for implementation to current operating fleets (many of which are in the USA), were announced at the 2009 Paris International Air show, by the US-based company Super98, created by former McDonnell Douglas and Boeing executives and engineers [42]. Specifically, Super98 will provide developed retrofits kits for aerodynamic drag reduction for efficiency improvement and extension of life for the Page 26/102

27 aforementioned aircraft models. According to the information available on the corporate website of Super98 [43], retrofit packages are available or to be introduced for: Douglas Aircraft Company DC-9 Retrofit kit The retrofit kit comprises of a certified low-drag tailcone for approximately 1% reduction in drag [44]: Figure 8: SUPER98 Douglas DC-9 Drag Reduction Configuration [44]. McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Two-phase Retrofit kit Specifically, the multi-phase drag reduction retrofit kit is available either as stand-alone (retrofit of one phase only) or combination (retrofit of both phases) [45]: First phase kit addresses reduction of parasitic drag in the areas around the nose, fuselage, wing, main landing gear, rudder, and elevator of the airframe, that includes flap hinge fairings, low drag slats and spoilers, improvements to wing trailing edge, wing-body sealing, re-faired tail skid, and modifications to ailerons, elevator, flap, rudder, center windshield, and main landing gear doors. The first phase kit is reported to achieve a fuel burn reduction of more than 3.5%, validated by test flight programme in the beginning of (b) Second phase kit addressing further drag reduction, that includes seals for reduction of rudder gap, seals for aileron lower gap and slat lower trailing edge, vertical stabilizer tip, fairing wing tip treatment, and CG management system. With the second phase kit it is reported that the fuel burn reduction to be achieved is an additional 4% (to Phase I fuel burn reduction %). Page 27/102

28 Figure 9: SUPER98 McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Drag Reduction Configurations (Phase I, Phase II configurations) and Annual Fuel Savings (post drag reduction retrofit) [45] [46]. It is of interest to note at this point that with respect to the scope of the RETROFIT project, the aforementioned Phase I Drag reduction package for the MD-80 is derivative of a project termed the CPIP conducted in the past by McDonnell Douglas (prior to merger with Boeing). Super98 states that they will be utilizing elements of the CPIP with the addition of new elements developed recently. With respect to tests and estimates made Super98 estimates that [47] the currently available MD-80 Phase I retrofit package could save up to US $283,000 per year with an acquisition costs (including installation) breakeven point at less than two years. The saving per annum is based on a fixed scenario (Fuel cost: US $3 per gallon, Stage length: 750nm, Trips per year: 1,375). The developed retrofit offering by Super98 for the MD-80 recently received an STC in September 2011, by the FAA (USA) [48]. For comparison purposes only with the performances and costs numbers stated by Super98 on their corporate website (above), a summary of the analogous figures (and facts) stated in the certification announcement publication are provided below: The Phase I retrofit package contributes to reduction in fuel burn by >2.5%, and with the further upgrade - retrofit option (Phase II retrofit package) a further 1% reduction in fuel burn can be achieved. Estimated fuel savings per aircraft / year (with Phase I retrofit package) to be over US $236,000 (based on fuel price of US $3/gallon oil). The installation of the Phase II retrofit package requires additional time and cannot be retrofitted during overnight maintenance stops. McDonnell Douglas MD-90 Retrofit kit The drag reduction kit [49] includes nacelle fairing, seals for aileron lower gap and elevator gap, vertical stabilizer tip fairing, wing tip treatment, wing trailing edge Page 28/102

29 treatment, and CG management system. The retrofit kit is reported to become available in The reported fuel burn reduction achieved with this drag reduction retrofit kit is 6%. Figure 10: SUPER98 McDonnell Douglas MD-90 Drag Reduction Configuration and Annual Fuel Savings (post drag reduction retrofit) [49] [50]. BOEING B717 Retrofit kit (initial designation MD-95) This is a planned drag reduction retrofit kit [51], comprising of increase of wingspan, nacelle fairings, aileron gap reduction, vertical tip fairings, and hinge covers and fairings. The retrofit kit is estimated to become available in The reported fuel burn reduction achieved with this drag reduction retrofit kit is 4%. Figure 11: SUPER98 Boeing B717 (MD-95) Drag Reduction Configuration and Annual Fuel Savings (post drag reduction retrofit) [51] [52]. McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Thrust Reverser Retrofit kit Introduced by Duggan Kinetics (USA) [53] and evaluated in late 2009 by American Airlines with a Pratt and Whitney JT8D-200 equipped MD-80, this retrofit kit concerns Page 29/102

30 a modified thrust reverser design addressing fuel burn and noise reduction. It is included in this section (rather than in section 2.1), as such modifications are mainly external to the existing engine. Main features of the modification is a new stow position for the thrust reverser whereas (i) the doors are utilized as an ejector during flight and (ii) with the re-positioning of the thrust reverser increase in thrust, while not adding weight to the aircraft. According to Dugan Kinetics the modified thrust reverser could have a fuel burn reduction performance 6% to 12%. Figure 12: Duggan Kinetics McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Modified Thrust Reverser Retrofit kit [53] Boeing series aircraft Boeing B727 The Boeing B727, initially manufactured in the mid-1960 s and delivered till the mid 1980 s, is a T-tailed tri-engine (two side-mounted to fuselage and one on fuselage) singleaisle short-to-medium range airliner [54], designed to land at airports with shorter runways and less infrastructure. Produced in two variants, a total of 1,832 units were built until production ceased in Figure 13: Boeing B727 [54]. Page 30/102

31 The success of the B727 was attributed to several of its operational and performance attributes, that included its unique wing design (full utilization), stability at low speeds and the capability of its APU to operate without the need for ground-based power unit or the one of the main engines to be running. Successful as it was it had one main disadvantage, this being that it was one of the noisiest commercial airliners categorized at Stage 2 (1972 U.S. Noise Control Act). In order to meet the mandated Stage 3 requirement, Boeing did investigate the possibility of replacing the engines of the B727 with newer engines (original Pratt and Whitney JT8D engines where of older low-bypass turbofan technology), however although it was deemed technically feasible it would not be a practical endeavour due to the significant structural changes that would have been needed, thus bringing about the development of noise-reduction kits or hush-kits for the engines equipping this Boeing model. As one of the most successful airliners produced, more than a few retrofit kits are listed as developed and available for the B727. In so far as engine hush-kits are concerned several specific development and application examples for information are provided in following as well as summary overview information of hush-kits development statistics (beyond the Boeing 727). Noise Reduction Retrofit kits - Stage 3 compliance Engine Hush-Kits A first example refers to a hush-kit for retrofit developed by the Quiet Wing Corporation (USA) [55]. This Stage 3 hush-kit [56] for noise reduction, includes a standard Pratt and Whitney mixer for engines (no.1, no. 3 side engines) that mate with the installed thrust reversers (thereby no engine nacelle modifications would be required) and a new centre engine pipe. These additions, in combination with the other drag reduction elements (that facilitate aircraft take-off with less thrust, higher cruise altitude, and reduced stall speed/lower thrust for landing) contribute overall to a noise level reduction performance compliant to Stage 3, and in some cases (depending on 727 model) compliant for Stage 4 classification. A well-known Stage 3 hush-kit retrofit package was developed by the freighter operator FedEx (USA) in collaboration with Pratt and Whitney and Boeing [57] and is included also for purposes of illustration. Specifically, this Stage 3 hush-kit was developed to be for light take-off weight and heavy take-off weight versions of the Boeing B727 (e.g., for Pratt and Whitney JT8D-7 or JT8D-9 powered Boeing B /-200s and Pratt and Whitney JT8D-9 thru -17AR powered B s respectively), and includes components for modifications to engine pylons, engines and thrust reversers. FedEx reports that as of end 2009 the developed retrofit package had secured over 740 firm orders in excess of 60 users. Page 31/102

32 Model Engine Thrust FedEx Stage 3 Kit Configurations Maximum Takeoff Weight Up To (lbs.) Lightweight Stage 3 Kits Maximum Landing Weight Up To (lbs.) B B JT8D-7 174, ,500 JT8D-9 174, ,500 JT8D-7 178, ,000 JT8D-9 177, ,500 Heavyweight Stage 3 Kits JT8D-9 197, ,000 B JT8D , ,000 JT8D , ,000 JT8D-17R 190, ,000 Figure 14: FedEx Boeing B727 Stage 3 Kit Illustration & Configurations data [57]. Figure 15: FedEx B727 Stage 3 Light-weight and Heavy-weight kits configurations data [58] [59]. Additional detailed technical and installation information on available B727 Stage 3 Hush-kits are also available from Raisbeck Engineering [60], that includes further detailed presentations [61] [62] on the individual modifications and performances charts of the kit developed by the company, as well as Raisbeck s B727 Stage 3 Hush-kit customers list as of late The solution developed by Raisbeck Engineering was a combination of re-optimization of the high-lift devices and system, to allow the B727 to take-off with less power/thrust (thus generating less noise), with external tailpipe mixers (zero moving parts fan), that contributed to further noise Page 32/102

33 reduction (>3dB) and increase to the external airflow involvement (similar to higher bypass ratio engines). According to the literature, the retrofit kit did not add to the OEW of the aircraft, nor required substantial changes to the airframe and engines, and included new actuators with long-time reliability. The reported installation time for the retrofit kit was 24 man-hours and 115 man-hours for the Boeing and the Boeing , respectively. Summary information on the Raisbeck developed solution as available on the aforementioned website and documentation are provided: Figure 16: Raisbeck Engineering Boeing 727 Stage 3 Noise Reduction kit - Raisbeck optimized Leading Edge Slat Configuration (IGW, HGW kits) (left) and External Mixer Tailpipe ( HGW kit) (right) [61] [62]. KIT MTOW* MLW* Installation Man-Hours** ,200 lbs 142,500 lbs 30 Standard (SGW) ,400 lbs 153,500 lbs 30 Increased (IGW) ,700 lbs 166,000 lbs 114 Heavy (HGW) ,000 lbs up to 201,200 lbs 166,000 lbs 215 Figure 17: Raisbeck Engineering Boeing 727 Stage 3 Noise Reduction kits technical data [60]. Engine hush-kit needs in the current day are limited, however in the 1990 s there were substantial activities around the development and acquisition of these for operators of aircraft types that did not then comply with the Stage 3 aircraft noise regulation. Per further extended search, more detailed information on hush-kit programs and use statistics were identified, specifically per a dedicated presentation given by Ariel Aviation, Inc. (USA) at the 1999 CAR Aircraft Value and Asset Management Conference [63]. Included within the presentation are various insightful statistical information (in tabular form), one category of which provides awareness on hush-kit development programs and market (use) -related data, and are provided below (statistics as of time of the presentation): Page 33/102

34 Figure 18: Aircraft Fleet Hushkit Development (Y1999) B727, B737, DC-8 and DC-9, Ariel Aviation [63]. Page 34/102

35 Figure 19: Hushkit Programs Status and Hushkit Costs (in US $Million) (Y1999), Ariel Aviation [63]. The presentation-study by Ariel Aviation also further included a couple of examples of cost and value comparisons of vendor-specific hushkit solutions application to two Boeing aircraft models, for the B727 and the B737: Figure 20: B727 and B737 Hushkit Aircraft Cost and Value Comparisons (Y1999), Ariel Aviation [63]. Notable conclusions offered by Ariel Aviation with respect to hush-kits developments and retrofit include: o There were no additional benefits to an operator regarding either prospects of additional revenue or reduced operational costs via the retrofit of hushkits, other than the compliance of the aircraft to the introduced noise regulation. o Hush-kits did not improve the economic life of the aircraft they are applied to rather they facilitated the continuance of the normal economic life of the aircraft to that prior of the introduction of the specific regulation. o The trading price of an aircraft was affected by the cost of acquired hush-kit. Drag Reduction Retrofit kit - Winglets Last but not least, a further retrofit solution element implemented by the Quiet Wing Corporation as part of its aforementioned Boeing B727 hush-kit retrofit package (but Page 35/102

36 mentioned separately here due to its singular nature) are winglets [64]. These retrofit aerodynamic elements were developed to address several performance and operational objectives ranging from drag reduction and reduction of drag-inducing wingtip vortices for reduction in fuel burn, and also to increase the aircraft operational range and MTOW. This retrofit included, further to winglets, of a patented modification to the flap system (flap settings modification, changes to wing camber). It is stated that fuel savings from this solution could be up to 6% (stage dependent), and would facilitate take-off at higher weights (+15,000lbs approximately), improve climb gradient and cruise altitude, and allow for landing at slower speeds. Figure 21: Quiet Wing Corporation B727s with modifications [64] Fokker / NG Aircraft series aircraft The case of the announced re-vitalization, update and restoration of full production of the out-of-production Fokker models F70 and F100 as the F70 / F100 NG [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] is included in this document as it is a unique case but with strong parallels to aircraft upgrades and retrofit cases mentioned in this and other sections and as per the scope of the RETROFIT project. The reference here to the F70 / F100 NG is to illustrate not a case of upgrade or retrofit for existing built and flying Fokker 70 /100 airframes (hence not an NG model), but of that pertaining to substantial modification and upgrades of an older airframe design (on the whole) with new technologies in the frame of a re-constituted full production framework, through which it may be plausible to speculate on the potential for future possibilities in so far as that certain new technology features included in the NG models could perhaps be deemed later on as suitable and applicable as retrofit offerings to the existing Fokker F70 / F100 aircraft models. The Fokker F70 is a T-tailed twin-engine single-aisle airliner [70] was developed to address the market segment (aircraft passenger capacity) between the Fokker F50 and ATR turboprop aircraft and the Boeing 737 and McDonnell Douglas MD-80 airliners. From first delivery in the mid-1990 s to last delivery of this aircraft model in 1997, over 40 F70 s had been produced. The Fokker F100 is a T-tailed twin-engine single-aisle airliner [71] from which the aforementioned Fokker F70 was derived (as a shorter version addressing the <100 seat Page 36/102

37 aircraft passenger capacity market segment). Between the F100 s introduction in the late s and final aircraft delivery in the late 1990 s (1997), 283 F100 aircraft were built. The F100 was developed as a modernized replacement to the predecessor Fokker F28 Fellowship aircraft model. Although based on the F28, the F100 featured a longer fuselage able to accommodate up to 107 passengers, new model Rolls-Royce engines, a re-designed wing (improving cruise performance by 30%) and modern avionics. Figure 22: Fokker F70 (left) and Fokker F100 (right) series aircraft [70] [71]. Per the available information on the Fokker F70 / F100 NG these models will incorporate new and/or improved airframe, aerodynamics, additional fuel capacity, and propulsion features and improvements, such as winglets for reduction of drag and fuel burn (2%) and new engines incorporating (as reported) a unique exhaust mixer that will contribute along with other design features to the overall noise emissions reduction performance of the aircraft. measures. Figure 23: XF Series Changes over Fokker 70/100 (left) and XF70 (top right) and XF100 (bottom right) [67] [68]. Additional incorporations include improved cabin features, avionics, aircraft health monitoring system and real-time aircraft data-link, but these latter features are not elaborated in this segment. Page 37/102

38 An additional interesting case with respect to conversion retrofit for the in-service Fokker F100 is currently under development by Phoenix Aero Solutions (USA) in the form of a combi-freighter project [72]. Albeit freighter aircraft or conversion of civilian aircraft to freighter aircraft are not in the scope of the RETROFIT project, combi-freighters are a slight exception to the case, as such aircraft may carry either cargo, passengers or both (optionally) due to their special mission to serve either remote areas and industrial sites (mining and oil fields operations sites). Although details per the conversion project are not yet readily available, the main modifications to the F100 at current entails the installation of the reliever door on the left side of fuselage, positioned in such manner so as allow bulk cargo and containers to be placed forward and aft of the aircraft, as also the installation of cargo attachment points and a roller-floor (optional). With the modifications, the F100 combi-freighter may be able to either accommodate 11 LD3 containers (cargo only use) or the combi-configuration use accommodate between passengers at the rear of the aircraft BOMBARDIER series aircraft - Bombardier CRJ900 The Bombardier CRJ900 is a stretched version of the previous CRJ700 aircraft model (increase to seat range) [73]. Main features amongst others of the aircraft include GE CF34-8C5 engines, FADEC, added leading edge slats, a revised wing (increased wingspan) and tail (increased span and anhedral). It is interesting to note that the initial CRJ900 was a modification of the prototype CRJ700, with the addition of longer fuselage plugs fore and aft. The CRJ900 was later replaced by the CRJ900 NextGen in 2007, to which the retrofit reference included in following is addressed. In short summary for background knowledge, the CRJ700 from which the -900 is derivative was also a stretched version of another previous Bombardier model, the CRJ200 (increased to seat range) [74]. The CRJ700 project was officially initiated in 1997, and vs. the -200 predecessor it featured a new wing with leading edge slats, and a modified fuselage (increased in length and width). The CRJ700 was equipped with GE CF34-8C1 engines but is also available with newer variant engines. The CRJ700 was also later replaced by the CRJ700 NextGen in Figure 24: Bombardier CRJ200 (left), CRJ700 (top right) and CRJ900 (bottom right) [74] [73]. Page 38/102

39 Per the introduction of the CRJ900 NextGen, Bombardier communicated that some of the featured solutions of the NextGen series will become available for purchase and retrofit by existing CRJ700/900 operators, but with no further elaboration as to which ones specifically [75]. As this is taken as statement of fact, and that these options may have been exercised by existing operators, amongst the features introduced to the NextGen series that are the probable retrofit options offered may be any of the following: o new composite flaps and vanes, utilizing resin-transfer moulding (RTM) process o conical engine nozzle (previously installed on the earlier-generation CRJ700) o new wing tip extension and winglets o avionics update to facilitate maximization of efficiency such as an autopilot-coupled Vnav (allowing for airlines to minimize fuel burn via optimisation of flight profiles). o new paint process and pre-paint anti-corrosion treatment with weight reduction benefit. Furthermore, for sake of completeness, on the cabin side additional offerings include new seating and seating configuration, new LED lighting options and larger overhead storage bins Turboprop aircraft Upgrades and Retrofits References to upgrades or retrofits (structural, aerodynamics, powerplants) developed and applicable to commercial size turboprop aircraft models, e.g., ATR, Bombardier Dash-8 series, Fokker F27s / F50s, Saab 340s / 2000s, are albeit scarce and few identified do not provide insight (either per technical, performance or economic information), in contrast to the more numerous and at the least baseline informative references per similar cases concerning smaller single/twin-engine turboprop aircraft used in general aviation, business, charter and light cargo operations. This could in part however be attributed to the fact that larger (passenger capacity) turboprop designs are more susceptible to negative effects on airframe tolerances and control characteristics brought about by substantial changes to their airframe elements, aerodynamic surfaces or powerplants, as it seems that the original designs in general did not incorporate sufficient margins for changes. Hence for types of modification and upgrades examined in this section, such changes to be implemented to turboprops have necessitated the production of upgraded / specific change(s) variants (as new aircraft). SAAB series Turboprops Saab 340Bplus-WT The Saab 340 is a two-engine turboprop aircraft [76] that started out as a joint-design and production project between Saab and Fairchild Aircraft (that eventually became a 100% Saab product when Fairchild Aircraft withdrew from the cooperation in short time years following production start). Production commenced in the early-1980 s and until production ceased in the end-1990 s, over 300 Saab 340 s were produced, in three variants spanning the Saab -340A, the -340B (incorporating wider horizontal stabilizers, newer engines), and the -340Bplus (incorporating improvements included in the later Saab 2000 turboprop model). Page 39/102

40 Figure 25: SAAB 340 Turboprop aircraft (left) and Saab 340Bplus-WT variant (right) [76]. With respect to upgrades/retrofits for turboprops of the like mentioned previously, the Saab 340 turboprop is referenced here as it is stated in Saab marketing literature [77] that a variant of the -340B series, specifically the Saab 340Bplus-WT for hot-and-high airfield operations, may be equipped with an optional wing tips package (Extended Wing Tips) for take-off distance reduction and increase of MTOW (performance improvements provided below): Figure 26: SAAB 340plus performance (take-off distance required) with / without WT-option [77]. An additional retrofit case reference for the Saab 340 [78] is included here rather than in section 2.1.3, as information further than the reference was not identified and thus insufficient to be included as a separate entry. This concerns an option carried out for the retrofit of the turboprop engine blades for the first variant, the -340A. Specifically in the mid-1980 s (1985) due to power increase made available for the engines equipping this aircraft variant (GE CT7-9B), consequently the propeller diameter was increased; this is stated to have been implemented to earlier -340A airframes (built pre-1985) through retrofit. Swearingen Aircraft / Fairchild Aircraft series Turboprops - SA227-AC Metroliner III Albeit not regarded as an evolution variant of its predecessor aircraft model but as a new aircraft, the SA227-AC Metroliner III turboprop was the successor to the previous SA226-TC Metroliner II turboprop. Based on the previous design, the newer variant Page 40/102

41 aircraft incorporated a range of new performance features (to engines and to structures), which is the main reason of mention here. Specifically amongst the upgrades listed were a number of drag-reduction modifications to the airframe (no further specific reference information identified), that also included landing gear doors that closed following the extension of the landing gear [79]. Figure 27: Swearingen Aircraft / Fairchild Aircraft SA227-AC Metroliner III Turboprop [80]. Other Turboprop modifications Other types of singular (in nature) modifications available or to be available to various turboprop models (but also applied to turbofan aircraft) are included here. o Retrofit - Replacement of Aircraft Exterior Lighting (ground safety) Recently a retrofit replacement solution for aircraft exterior lighting has been introduced by EMTEQ (USA) [81]. This concerns an agreement for fleet-wide retrofit its developed LED Dual Mode Anti-Collision Light and LED Dual Mode White Tail Light on the Bombardier Dash-8 Q400 turboprop fleet of the domestic airline Flybe (UK), reportedly the largest operator of the aircraft type (2010). The primary motivation by Flybe to proceed with such an upgrade was resultant of demand to increase ground operations safety, as the new LED lighting offering improves illumination on the belly and propeller area during ground operations. The offering utilizes chip-on-board LED technology, and brings with it a range of operational improvements features and benefits (vs. traditional systems). Some of these include [82] reduction in power consumption, integrated power supplies, contribution to aircraft weight reduction (thus contributing to fuel efficiency), increased reliability (longer bulb life vs. traditional lighting solutions) and robustness (including vibration-resistance), and ease of installation/maintenance. o Retrofit Gravel Kits for Aircraft One type of other retrofit package applied to turboprops concerns the added protection of aircraft to allow access to unpaved or unprepared runways, such as for example so-called gravel kits [83]. The main purpose of such kits are to deflect foreign objects and debris away from engine inlets and the propellers, and usually installed at the aircraft front landing gear tire, and in some cases additional measures are applied (coatings, other) to protect trailing edges and antennas (if located on the underside of the fuselage). Such protection kits available as retrofit exist and have been applied to various turboprop aircraft types (including turbofan Page 41/102

42 aircraft), such as for example the Saab 340Bplus-WT [77], the ATR [84], and the Bombardier Dash [85]. o Retrofit Amphibious Technology for Aircraft (drag reduction, cruise performance improvement) Amphibious aircraft per se are not in the scope of the RETROFIT project, nor do large-capacity commercial amphibious airliners exist anymore in modern times. However the identified retrofit case identified here is included per multiple reasons these being that amphibious aircraft technology is still a current topic, the revival value mission extension potential for aircraft models per the application of such technology (not-originally destined for amphibious use), the reference is the result of recent development venture (2010), and last but not least amongst the range of small to large-scale aircraft that this retrofit development is claimed to be applicable to, one aircraft model is a previously mentioned turboprop aircraft [86] [87] [88]. The retrofit solution, a joint development between Quasar Aerospace Industries (USA) and Tigerfish Aviation (AU), is a retractable amphibious pontoon technology (RAPT), and the proof-of-concept aircraft for the technology developmentcompletion selected by the joint-venture is the Dornier 228 NG turboprop. According to the description of the retrofit technology and per the claims of the joint-venture partners, the RAPT system is applicable for retrofit to a range of existing aircraft of varying size/weight class, e.g., executive aircraft, utility aircraft, regional aircraft, and military transports. Figure 28: Quasar Aerospace Industries and Tigerfish Aviation Retracting Float Concept [89]. The main issues with amphibious aircraft is that their aerodynamic performance is significantly impacted by the traditional exposed floaters/pontoons (increases in aircraft drag, fuel burn, operating costs as also reductions in cruise speed, flight range and aircraft payload capabilities), and also in most cases the added floaters/pontoons are permanent fixtures to the aircraft, hence not useful or needed when such aircraft are used per occasion for land-based operations. The under development RAPT system by design seeks to address the increased aerodynamic drag problem caused by traditional floats/pontoons installation via the fitting of a streamlined pannier beneath the fuselage into which also incorporated composite Page 42/102

43 pontoons will retract into once the aircraft is airborne. In addition the retrofit RAPT system is customisable to different aircraft types and is not a permanent retrofit fixture, thus removable when not required, i.e., to use the aircraft as originally designated for land-based operations. Per the studies and development work conducted (based on the Viking Air DHC-6 Twin Otter), results show that the amount of drag reduction to be achieved is sufficient enough for cost benefit of the RAPT system. With respect to the application of the RAPT system to the Dornier 228 NG turboprop, it is estimated that the retrofit system will increase the weight of the specific aircraft by approximately 1,420lbs. Main issues with respect to the retrofit system viability concern the sub-systems that will enable the retraction of the pontoons into the pannier, namely the requisite electrical and hydraulic systems Aircraft Modifications and Retrofits: Aircraft with engines-under-wing configuration Included here are references for upgrades and retrofits of aircraft with under-wing mounted engines, addressing aircraft that are either still in-production or out-ofproduction. Additionally, aircraft retrofit cases and solutions provided here refer not only to narrow-body regional aircraft (as per the case in previous sections) but also to wide-body long-range aircraft. Long-range aircraft at present are only manufactured by the airframe OEMs Airbus (EU) and Boeing (USA). The following listings for past or under development retrofits is by no means meant to be complete and exhaustive, in so far as to the covering all possible aircraft models and respective variants. Short descriptions, that may or may not include features of distinction, are provided merely for the purpose of providing a base of reference to subsequent information concerning the upgrades and retrofit options (e.g., aerodynamic, structural changes, external elements). In the particular case of this section, whereas information concerning PIPs is concerned, any short references to aircraft model individualities is done for the aforementioned purpose as PIP developments mentioned were developed around specific aircraft BRITISH AEROSPACE series aircraft - BAe 146 The British Aerospace (UK) BAe 146 is an out-of-production T-tailed medium-sized highwing regional commercial airliner equipped with four engines [90]. Production of the BAe 146, including an improved variant termed the Avro RJ introduced in the beginning of the 1990 s, began in 1983 and continued until The BAe 146 as well as the Avro RJ were available in 3 versions respectively, and 387 aircraft in total were produced. The rationale for inclusion here is per a specific conversion program under development by the Cordner Aviation Group (DE), for use of the BAe 146 for same mission as that per the purpose of the Fokker 100 Combi-freighter conversion program, i.e., for use by the mining and petroleum industries [91]. The under development combi-conversion retrofit package will host a range of replacement solutions ranging from such items as a gravel kit (enabling landing on unpaved landing strips) to a number of weight reduction measures Page 43/102

44 that include replacement of conventional overhead lighting with LED lighting and replacement of the current seats with modern lighter model seats. Figure 29: Cordner Aviation Group BAe 146 Surveyor Combi-freighter [91] Retrofit Aerodynamic Improvements - Wingtip devices (Boeing, Airbus) Although generally referred to as winglets, there are different types of wingtip devices that are applicable to aircraft either as line-fit or retrofit. This type of retrofit to aircraft, especially with regards to Boeing and Airbus models whether wide-body or narrow-body models, have become one of the most common type of retrofit projects adopted in the past decade by airline operators. The main benefit of these devices is their contribution to reduction of aircraft drag, specifically the component of drag termed induced drag [92]. As aforementioned, although the retrofit of such devices is common today, the type of device to be retrofitted (further than cost issues) depends substantially on the specificities of the aircraft model (technical characteristics and use). There are various types of such devices, that in summary and with application examples are provided in following [93]. Types and applications may refer to both Boeing and Airbus aircraft models alike, but also to types and application specific to either of the aforementioned airframe OEMs. Figure 30: Winglets application examples on Boeing 747 (left) and McDonnell Douglas MD-11 (right) aircraft [92] [94]. Page 44/102

45 Wingtip Fences This variant of wingtip device extends upwards and downwards from the tip of the wing, and is available for and most commonly seen on existing aircraft models of Airbus, i.e., A300, A310, A320-series, and the A380. Raked Wingtips Figure 31: Wingtip Fences application examples on various Airbus aircraft models [93]. This variant of wingtip device, also referred to as integrated wingtip extensions, involves the tip of the wing being of a higher degree of sweep than the rest of the wing. Per tests conducted by Boeing and NASA, this type of wingtip device exhibits a better drag reduction performance (by 5.5%) vs. that obtained by conventional winglets. Raked wingtips are used and retrofitted on various Boeing aircraft models (on the long-range or extended range models and upgrades termed as -LR and -ER models respectively), such as on the B767 and B777 series aircraft. Figure 32: Raked Wingtips application examples on Boeing B /400 (left, center) and B (right) variants [95] [96]. Blended Winglets This variant of wingtip device, designed by Aviation Partners Inc. (USA) [97], the popular selection for application to Boeing aircraft models (either for line-fit or for retrofit), are integrated to an aircraft with a smooth curve instead of a sharp angle [98]. Blended winglets are available and applicable to more than several Boeing models including [99] the B737 Classic and NG variants, the B757, and the B767. According to Boeing, by the 3 rd quarter of 2009, in excess of 2,500 Boeing aircraft had been equipped with blended winglets. Page 45/102

46 Figure 33: Blended Winglet structure and Airplane-level configuration changes for Blended Winglets retrofit to Boeing B [92]. Figure 34: Blended Winglets application examples on Boeing B (left), B (center), and B (right) [100] [101] [95]. According to source [98], Airbus in the recent past had also tested blended winglets options for the Airbus A320 family as part of a joint design and development programme with Winglet Technology (USA), but tests concluded that the achieved performance benefits of the candidate winglet designs did not warrant further consideration and adoption. Further to this, in 2005 Fokker Aerostructures and Fokker Services embarked on a 16 week winglet study-programme for client Airbus UK, from week 42 (2005) to week 6 of 2006 [102]. The main deliverables for Airbus UK were two sets of winglets that were to be fitted to two Airbus test aircraft, one Airbus A320 and one Airbus A318, for flight tests programme. The main conclusions obtained from the overall programme were that although the initial retrofit aspects were technically acceptable, the tests concluded that this type of wingtip device did not initially deliver the envisaged fuel burn rate and emission reduction performances. Furthermore, the certification, weight and critical nature of the wing loading along with the fall in fuel prices and limited benefits made the modification no longer a viable option. Page 46/102

47 Sharklets Figure 35: Fokker Aerostructures and Fokker Services Winglets Programme timeline (left) and Airbus A320 equipped with large winglets [102] [103]. In 2009 Airbus launched its own brand of large blended winglets design, termed as the "sharklets" (due to their resemblance to the dorsal fin of a shark) [104]. The sharklets design is the result of previous wingtip devices designs and experiences applied to Airbus series aircraft (e.g., wingtip fences, large blended winglets), and are expected to improve aerodynamic performance with multiple benefits, e.g., increase in aircraft range and payload, reduction in emissions and fuel burn, and improved take-off and ascent performance including lower fuel burn, reduced emissions, increased range and payload, better take-off, rate-of-climb, and cruise altitude, as also add greater residual value to the aircraft [105]. According to Airbus, the attributes of the sharklets (height, weight) are 2.4m and 200kg respectively, and that the addition of sharklets would improve A320-series aircraft performance by 3.5% (fuel burn reduction) resulting in annual emissions reduction amount per aircraft by approximately 700 tons. Figure 36: Airbus A320 equipped with Airbus Sharklets large blended winglets design [106] [107]. The aforementioned Sharklet programme then was offered as optional for newproduction Airbus A320 series aircraft, and the program launch customer was Air New Zealand (NZ) that opted to have their on order A320s fitted with sharklets [107] [108]. Other A320-series aircraft customers that opted for the addition of winglets for their on order aircraft include (not exhaustive listing), Air Arabia (UAE) for 28 out of 44 of their on order A320 s (2011) [109] and Finnair (FI) for 5 on order A321 s (2010) for which Page 47/102

48 the airline is also the launch customer (for sharklets the equipped variant of the A321) [110]. Due to demand by Airbus customers regarding update of their current Airbus A320- series fleet products with sharklets (as before these were available only for new production aircraft), Airbus recently launched a development programme to offer the capability of retrofit of sharklets (either through own operations or via third party) to the legacy fleets [108]. The sharklets offering for A320-series aircraft (A319, A320, A321) retrofit will be available by 2013, and the launch customer for the retrofit programme is JetBlue Airways (USA) that has committed to retrofit its entire A320 fleet with sharklets [111]. According to Airbus the price of the sharklets will be approximately US $950,000 (although the total cost of sharklet retrofit kit has not yet been announced), and these will be similar to the sharklets that are provided on new production A320-series aircraft Other Modification, Upgrades and Retrofits - Boeing series aircraft Herein are included references and cases for upgrade/retrofit kits, packages and implementations either developed by Boeing or by independent companies in cooperation with Boeing, addressing mainly aerodynamic efficiency improvements (further than winglets), short-field operational capability and replacement of other external to the aircraft components that also lead to better performances and cost savings. Quiet Wing Corporation modifications for the B737 A retrofit solution developed by Quiet Wing (USA) comprises of a modification kit for the flap system applicable to certain older variants Boeing B737 models (equipped with older generation engines) to improve aerodynamic efficiency of the wing and aircraft MTOW and to reduce drag, imparting an upgrade in performance similar to that derivative of an engine upgrade programme [112]. Together with above modification kit, Quiet Wing also offers as part a retrofit wingtip device retrofit solution in the form of mini-winglets for the B , -400 and -500 model variants [113] [114]. Figure 37: Boeing B Adv. equipped with Quiet Wing Mini-Winglets [113]. Page 48/102

49 AvAero aerodynamic modification for the B737 A retrofit solution developed and certified by AvAero (USA) termed the FuelMizer [115] [116] for application to the Boeing B737 series -200/-300/-400/-500 models, addressing the improvement of the aerodynamic efficiency of the wing (increasing the lift-to-drag ratio) and reduction of induced drag of the wings and horizontal stabilizer, without costly structural modifications. This modification involves the repositioning of the trailing edge and outboard flaps (slightly aft and drooping them downward), resulting in increased wing area, airfoil camber, and lengthened wing chord. The retrofit does not add any further substantial weight to the aircraft (around 40 pounds) and the fuel burn reduction performance obtained with the retrofit is at the least 4%. The AvAero modification package is valued at US $125,000 and requires approximately 250 man-hours to implement usually during a light C-check. AeroTech aerodynamic modification for the B737 Similar in nature to the AvAero FuelMizer retrofit modification, AeroTech (USA) developed and certified a retrofit kit [117] [118] for the Boeing B737 series -200/-300/- 400/-500 models, addressing the improvement of the aerodynamic efficiency of the wing (increasing the lift-to-drag ratio) and reduction of induced drag of the wings and horizontal stabilizer, without costly structural modifications. This modification involves the repositioning of the aft segments of the trailing edge flaps aft and below their standard locations when the flaps are retracted, resulting in increased wing area, airfoil camber, and lengthened wing chord. The fuel burn reduction performance obtained with the retrofit is at the least 4%, and the modification package requires approximately 300 man-hours to implement usually during a scheduled maintenance check. Figure 38: AeroTech B737 wing modification [117]. Airlines listed as users of the AeroTech modification for the Boeing B737 include Brussels Airlines (BE), Swiftair (ES), MNG Airlines (TR), Shenzhen Donghai Airlines (CN), Ukraine International Airlines (UA), and GECAS (USA). In particular to Brussels Airlines, which became a user of the Aerotech modification kit in 2008, in May of 2010 the airline announced that they will proceed to retrofit the wing modification kit to the remainder of their Boeing B fleet. Page 49/102

50 Boeing Enhanced Short Field Performance package for the B737 The development of this short field performance improvement package (SFP) was prompted by Boeing back in 2004 on request by the launch customer GOL Air Transport (BR) that is a Boeing B operator, in order to allow access to airports with runways less than 5000ft (less than 1500meters) in length with increased payload [119] [120]. The developed and delivered (to GOL) SFP improvement package comprises of a two-position tail skid enabling reduced approach speeds, sealed leading-edge slats to provide increased lift during takeoff, and increased flight spoiler deflection on the ground to improve takeoff and landing performance. Figure 39: Boeing Short Field Performance test aircraft and GOL Airlines B SFP [119] [120]. Figure 40: Boeing Short Field Performance improvement package modification elements [121] [122]. The SFP improvement package started out as being optional for the B , but since then some features are available as optional for the B and B models, while for the B ER the SFP improvement package is standard. According to source [120] in 2006 Boeing had more than 300 SFP improvement packages on order and options from 9 airlines (Boeing B , B ER operators). According to GOL (2007) [123] it has planned that the B SFP variant will comprise 50%of the airline s Boeing 737 fleet, i.e., per the GOL Combined Fleet Plan out of a total of 102 B737s, 52 will be the B SFP variant. Page 50/102

51 Boeing Performance Improvement Packages (PIP) for the B737 and B777 o Boeing 737 NG PIP Per the successful previous B777 PIP programme, Boeing has further developed, certified and is in process of delivery of the Performance Improvement Package for the Boeing B737 NG [124] [125]. The goal of the B737 PIP that comprises of a combination of aerodynamic efficiency and engine improvements is to offer up to 2% reduction in fuel burn for B737 NG operators, and according to Boeing the overall performance improvement translates to an average saving of USD $120,000 per aircraft / year per current fuel prices. The aerodynamic efficiency improvements of the B737 PIP include low drag wheel well enclosures, streamlined slat and spoiler trailing edges, reduced drag anticollision light fairings, and a revised exhaust vent (featuring a new smart actuator) for the environmental control system. The engine improvement features are two-fold. With the introduction by CFM of the CFM56-7BE turbofan engine, a modification (that is standard for new production B737s) is now available [10] for the high and low pressure turbine. The remaining engine modification features of the B737 PIP currently under completion and delivery is the addition of a low-drag nozzle and plug engine configuration. Figure 41: Boeing B737 NG Engine Plug and Nozzle before (left) and after (right) 737 PIP [125]. Although some airlines have recently taken delivery of Boeing 737 NGs with some of the aforementioned PIP features, officially KLM will be the first airline to receive a B737 (B ) that will include all of the aforementioned aerodynamic and engine upgrades. o Boeing 777 PIP The Boeing Performance Improvement Package (PIP) programme was originally launched as a derivative of the Boeing B ER project, whereas numerous performance enhancements solutions developed (for the -300 ER) were later made available as a retrofit package for earlier B777 models (the -200, -200ER, and inservice -300s) in the last couple of years [126]. The B777 PIP consists of the following improvement features: Page 51/102

52 Improved Ram Air system: contributes to aircraft drag reduction via improved thrust recovery at the exit of the system. Figure 42: Boeing B777 PIP Improved Ram Air System [126]. Drooped Aileron (software-based modification): contributes to aircraft drag reduction via creation of higher aerodynamic loading on the outboard part of the wing and making the spanwise loading more elliptical. Figure 43: Boeing B777 PIP Drooped Aileron [126]. Page 52/102

53 Improved Vortex Generators: contribution to drag reduction via replacement of the original vortex generators with smaller 737-type vortex generators. Figure 44: Boeing B777 PIP Improved Vortex Generators [126]. According to Boeing, the B777 PIP is an effective solution for retrofit of B777 models previous to the B ER, and overall the PIP increases the B777 s range, MTOW and reduces fuel burn and aircraft emissions by 1%. Boeing estimates that the RoI period for operators should be in the time frame of 12 to 18 months. This timeframe is relative to the choice of the PIP elements implemented, as the 1% fuel burn and emissions reduction is achievable by implementing all three elements, however with the implementation of only the improved ram air system and the dropped aileron upgrade, 60% of the overall performance may be obtained. The Boeing B777 PIP has proved to be a successful retrofit option for B777 operators, even for fleet-size retrofits. An example of fleet-wide implementation and retrofit of the B777 PIP by an airline is United Airlines [USA] that in March 2011 concluded a deal with Boeing to modify 52 B777s, and the estimated that the fuel burn reduction savings per aircraft / year will be in the range of USD $200,000 [127]. Boeing Brakes replacement and retrofit Carbon brakes offer substantial advantages over the more commonly used steel brakes. In comparison, carbon brakes are far lighter, have better energy absorption performance and are more durable (up to twice as many landings), resulting in benefits as far as fuel burn and emissions reduction are concerned. With more recent progress in the efficiency of manufacturing and overhaul procedures for carbon brakes they have become cost-competitive with respect to steel brakes that are more common to short-medium range aircraft [128]. Page 53/102

54 Figure 45: Carbon Brake Weight Savings [128]. Carbon brakes were standard on many Boeing models, i.e., on the next to last variant of the B747 (-400), the B777, B767, and on the out-of-production MD-90 and MD-11 and on one variant of the now discontinued B757 (-300). Currently carbon brakes are now available for retrofit to other variants of the aforementioned models, i.e., on B , B and B model variants, as also for other models such as the B737 NG Other Modification, Upgrades and Retrofits Airbus series aircraft Herein are included references and cases for upgrades/retrofit kits, packages and implementations developed by Airbus, addressing mainly aerodynamic efficiency improvements (further than winglets), and extended range operations. Airbus Range Extension modification and retrofit for A320 series aircraft This upgrade solution for the Airbus A319 consists mainly of the addition of an extra center tank in order to increase aircraft range through additional fuel capacity [129]. With this modification, the A319 ER is stated to have a range of 3700Nm (equivalent to 8 ½ hours of flight time). The modification of the A319 standard to the extended range version is available as a retrofit package, and an example case of its use is by Tunisair (TN) whereas in 2006 the airline expressed the intent to retrofit up to 3 A319s with the retrofit package to upgrade these to the ER variant. Airbus Performance Improvement Package (PIP) for the A340 It is stated in passing in the context of a larger general reference that Airbus had in the past developed a Performance Improvement Package for a particular model of the A340, i.e., the Airbus A [130]. The A340 is a four-engine long-range widebody commercial jetliner, produced by Airbus in four variants (-200, -300, -500, and - 600) designed to service extended operating ranges. This Performance Improvement Package for the A is said to have included modifications to increase the Page 54/102

55 variant s fuel capacity and MTOW, as also more powerful engines. Further details however on this cited Airbus PIP have not been identified. Airbus aerodynamic modification for the A300 series aircraft This improved NACA Duct solution is a retrofit development by Airbus for the discontinued Airbus A300 and A310 aircraft models, and is intended as a drag and fuel burn reduction improvement feature for the wing (without any structural modifications) [131]. The NACA Duct is dual purpose, to retain the differential pressure between the interior of the fuel tanks and the outside atmospheric pressure to a minimum (as an air-inlet) and also to permit fuel flow overboard in the event of an automatic refuel failure (as a fuel vent system outlet). The developed modification aims at the aerodynamic optimization of the air-vent inlet NACA Duct with a new aerodynamic shape, in the form of a single one-piece insert. The new insert implementation is through straightforward attachment to the NACA Duct with new fasteners and no other needs for modification or replacement of other elements. Figure 46: Airbus A300/A310 Family Optimized Air-Vent Inlet NACA Duct [131]. The performance improvement achieved is a 0.3% reduction in drag that translates to approximate 20-30kg fuel saving per flight. 2.3 Aircraft Security & Safety systems - Upgrades and Retrofits The section provides a short overview of examples of retrofit packages developed and applied by airlines, airframe OEMs, and suppliers that address various situations concerning aircraft safety and security. These scenarios include aircraft security monitoring (post 9/11) and aircraft and passengers safety, such as in cases regarding aircraft decompression incidents (hull-breach or hull-loss), emergency lighting for passengers evacuation, and cargo compartment fires. Page 55/102

56 2.3.1 Aircraft Security Monitoring Retrofits Aircraft security systems have become an important issue for airlines since the events of 9/11, to enable cabin monitoring and to allow for pilots to see what is happening on the cabin side of the locked flight deck door and the main cabin area (detection of disruptive or suspicious behaviour and/or or other non-related events that may be detected by inplace sensing technology). An example of development and retrofit of such systems to aircraft was recently introduced by Lufthansa Technik (DE) for an undisclosed customer [132]. The developed surveillance system for retrofit, called aerosight, is an on-board IP-based camera system with an integrated LAN connection. The network consists of 16 cameras positioned at various locations in the aircraft cabin, with automatic switching between viewing mode for daylight conditions (i.e., color vision) and viewing mode for nighttime condition (i.e., infrared vision). Control of the camera network as also viewing of the network feed can be done by the pilots, either through EFBs or laptops, which are connected to the aerosight network. No extra control units or displays are required to be installed in the cockpit. Figure 47: Lufthansa Technik aerosight Cabin Surveillance System [132]. Other systems similar in type and operation have been developed and are marketed by Vendors and OEMs, such as from Goodrich (USA), Airbus, Boeing, AirWorks (USA), AD Aerospace (UK), Rockwell Collins (USA), and many others [133]. A cost comparison of several types of surveillance systems is provided in following: Page 56/102

57 Figure 48: Aircraft Cabin Surveillance Systems Cost Comparison (based on 2004 data) [133]. Although cabin surveillance systems are widely adopted (either via national mandate or voluntary purchase) and retrofitted to aircraft fleets, the main issues that remains for airlines are the price per unit acquisition, installation, and pilot training (in particular for operators with very large fleets). A further issue of concern to airlines relate to the data privacy and security aspects involved per to recording and data transmission - although per this specific issue Boeing had proved through a contract study for the FAA that this feasible Aircraft Safety - Decompression Incidents systems retrofits A potential and real safety and survivability issue for aircraft, in particular for ageing airframes, is the possibility of in-flight decompression incidents. Such incidents are not rare and could occur today, examples in the recent years being cases involving Southwest Airlines (USA) where two such incidents since 2009 forced the airline to ground a significant number of their Boeing B passenger aircraft for inspection [134] [135]. Such incidents are normally thought of as being the result of either accumulated airframe fatigue (cycles), improper maintenance and repair practices or even as the result of structural failure when an aircraft is subjected to extreme conditions inflight (loss of control incidents and the like that may subject aircraft to maneuvers that are out of their designed tolerance limits). However incidents such as the ones experienced by Southwest (but not only) surfaced new probable causes for vigilance by airlines to conduct even more frequent structural inspections of their aircraft, e.g., whereas defects (in processes) may be introduced in the manufacturing and assembly stages. In the Page 57/102

58 Southwest Airlines incidents, the B aircraft involved were of 15 years of age with 42,500 cycles/50,500 flight hours and 39,781 cycles/48,722 flight hours respectively, and the hull failures occurred in fuselage sections aft of the wings. Figure 49: Southwest Airlines B s Hull Failure Incidents - ruptures near the leading edge of the vertical stabiliser , (left) and slightly aft of the wing (right) 2011 [134] [135]. The inclusion of this type of incident with respect to this report and the RETROFIT project is that investigation into the first Southwest B737 case incident revealed that the hole that developed was the result of pre-existing fatigue at a chemically milled step" (fatigue cracking), during the production process of the aircraft. In such cases, further than the potential requirement for more frequent inspections of the aircraft as also for more reliable inspection techniques during both aircraft manufacture or aircraft inspection (in-service) phases, the problem also highlights the possible growing need for airframe monitoring technologies (structural health monitoring) for ageing airframes and the retrofit solutions to apply such through retrofit. Further than the potential for SHM systems application to ageing airframes via retrofit, additional in-market types of retrofit measures for such incidents include solutions such as the Decompression Sensing System/Door Controller and Electronic Entry Keypad module for aircraft flight decks, developed by Northwest Aerospace Technologies Inc. (USA) [136]. This retrofit solution was developed in 2001 in response to industry demand for solutions enabling rapid unlocking of the cockpit door in the event of a decompression event. The system offering comprises mainly of a decompression sensing and control module enabling rapid detection and response to a decompression event (also applicable for crew rest modules). The decompression Sensing System/Door Controller and Electronic Entry Keypad is available for retrofit for a range of Airbus and Boeing aircraft models, such as for the A300 series (A300, A310), A320 series (A318, A319, A320, A321), A330/A340 series, the A380 and the B767, B777, B747 series aircraft, respectively. Although modification and retrofit listings in general carried out by Northwest Aerospace Technologies (aircraft types, numbers) are available on the company website, a definitive figure of how many aircraft may have the aforementioned retrofit solution installed is not indicated. Page 58/102

59 2.3.3 Aircraft Safety - Emergency Power / Lighting systems Retrofits An interesting development case for retrofit concerns emergency lighting systems (and powering thereof) for aircraft. Current systems, which rely on on-board battery systems, require routine checking, testing and upkeep (particularly per system batteries charge and re-charge) and the process is both timely and costly. Alternatives for this safety-related feature of aircraft comes in the form of Wireless Emergency Primary Power Systems, or WEPPS, that have been developed and are retrofitted to aircraft to reduce time and costs (and associated wastes) with respect to the WEPPS checking, testing/diagnostics and maintenance. Two examples of WEPPS systems available and installed to current aircraft are provided in following by Fokker Services and STG Aerospace. The WEPPS developed by Fokker Services [137] for operators of Fokker aircraft (Fokker F50, F60, F70, and F100) and for other aircraft make-types, whereas the primary features are replacement of the traditional battery types (NiCd) with approved fit-for-life nonrechargeable battery modules, and system diagnostics module. These are the primary features of WEPPS packages, and resulting additional features/benefits are reductions in system weight and substantial reduction maintenance costs (less maintenance required due to improved system reliability, less parts changes, and elimination of the traditional for conventional system time consuming system visual checks-testing). Additionally, WEPPS packages are designed around the traditional systems they are meant to replace, and negative impacts per installation are minimal, since the replacement batteries are fitted to the existing mounting points, and the additional diagnostics module requires only wiring and reworking at the point of installation. A further reference to WEPPS development and installation to current (and older make) aircraft comes from STG Aerospace (UK) [138]. The main features and advantages of the STG WEPPS package are similar to same (objectives wise) as to the aforementioned WEPPS retrofit package by Fokker Services. Further mention is made here with respect to the STG offered WEPPS as several references of installation to specific aircraft types operators is made. These include an agreement for installation/retrofit of the STG WEPPS package to aircraft of Canjet (CAN). Canjet operates a fleet of Boeing B s, and in June 2008 at least two of its aircraft were fitted with the WEPPS (however information on the final number of aircraft fitted has not been identified). An additional example worth mention is the retrofit of the STG Aerospace WEPPS package on an out-of-production aircraft model, the Dornier 328 turbofan jet (first instance on VIP conversion) by 328 Support Services (DE) [139]. This is reportedly on order for other Dornier 328 jets and turboprop operators (passenger version). Referring further to safety lighting upgrades and retrofits, one further option addresses progress in the replacement of electric floor path marking lighting in aircraft with nonelectric floor path marking. This type of solution is based on photoluminescence, and for cases of emergency where cabin lighting malfunctions or fails, the non-electric floor path lighting technology ensures that passengers can clearly distinguish the paths to the aircraft emergency exits. The need for such systems had arisen from demand (in the 1990 s) for alternative and more robust solutions to the conventional high-voltage systems Page 59/102

60 for such purposes, as the latter were susceptible to damage by physical wear (treading over by passengers and cabin equipment such as trolleys), and faults caused by environmental conditions in the cabin (e.g., by humidity). In addition the conventional systems (such as in the previous case that brought about the need for the WEPPS solution), were costly to maintain hence alternative solutions had to have improved performance and less to no maintenance requirements. Examples of available non-electric floor path marking solutions (or improvement from the first versions) include the Guideline ColourFit system by Lufthansa Technik [140] and the SafTGlo system by STG Aerospace [141]. For sake of providing some clarification as to use features that make such offerings attractive all around, for instance in the case of the Guideline ColourFit solution by Lufthansa Technik, for a 12-hour flight the system requires approximately minutes of cabin light to recharge, and re-charging capability does not diminish over time. Reportedly the specific version of this type of solution is installed in approximately 8,000 aircraft (assuming combined forward fit and retrofit) [142], and some cases include that of Etihad Airlines (UAE) [143] for retrofit of the system in question to the entire fleet of the airline spanning the airline s Boeing B777 s and Airbus A320 s, A330 s and A340 s. A last case of note, is the retrofit installation of this type of system in 2010 to at least half of the entire McDonnell Douglas MD-11 fleet of Delta Airlines (USA), and eventual retrofit to the remaining MD-11s of the airline [144] Aircraft Safety - Fire Detection, Suppression, and Pilot Vision systems Retrofits A case of past retrofits (although mandated by rule change by aviation authorities - first by the FAA in late 1990 s) for all aircraft -cargo and civil-, was the mandatory installation of fire detection and suppression systems. While these systems are in effect today on all aircraft, this type of safety feature (and related systems) is one very relevant example of past retrofit technology and solution development that is still a current issue in particular with regards to current events (e.g., recent aircraft incidents and losses involving fires caused by lithium batteries and improperly packed volatile cargo). Some representative examples of retrofits developments, operated either on cargo or passenger aircraft, are included in following. An interesting case of fleet-wide implementation of fire detection and suppression systems, derivative of concerted RTD effort over a period of approximately one decade, concerns the freighter aircraft industry, specifically by FedEx [145] [146]. In part, this retrofit system solution refers to the development and fleet retrofit of an Active Fire Suppression System for compartments (without need for initiation or intervention by the cargo aircraft crew). The system is a combination of thermal sensors (i.e., infrared) and heat modeling, that addresses the task of fire location and is complemented by foaming agent generators and an overhead container injector (for pinpoint positioning and delivery of the extinguishing agent). The system was originally developed by FedEx for the Douglas DC-10 and McDonnell Douglas MD-11 freighter aircraft models, with plans to expand installation (at a rate of one per month) to the rest of the fleet, and furthermore to be a mandatory feature on all newly Page 60/102

61 produced aircraft for FedEx prior to delivery. According to further reference (2009) [147], this system is to be installed on 74 FedEx aircraft, e.g., on all McDonnell Douglas 58 MD- 11s by early 2011 and on all Boeing B777 freighters on order. Figure 50: FedEx Active Fire Suppression System [146]. A supplementary development worth mention again from the area of freighter aircraft operators comes from UPS [148], following an incident with a Boeing B freighter. The fielded development by UPS ensures pilot capability to control aircraft in cases of fire and smoke penetration of the cockpit in flight, through the installation of an emergency vision assurance system or EVAS. The developed system allows pilots to see the cockpit instruments in such events and the system overlays the cockpit panel to provide a clear view through a window. The EVAS comprises of an inflatable transparent bubble that is pressurised with filtered cockpit air. Per further reference [149], the EVAS will be installed across several aircraft types of UPS s fleet, such as on its McDonnell Douglas MD-11s and on its Boeing B757s, B767s, and B s. The EVAS feature is already fitted on UPS s Airbus A300 aircraft. Furthermore, per information on the EVAS website [150], this retrofit system has secured a substantial customer base further than the freight operator sector, including commercial aircraft operators and aircraft OEMs. Page 61/102

62 Figure 51: EVAS - Emergency Vision Assurance System [150]. In so far as same type examples of system development and retrofits by airframe OEMs, examples from Boeing and Fokker Services are provided below. Fire detection and suppression systems developed and available for retrofit by Boeing for its range of passenger and cargo aircraft models [151], comprise measures addressing temperature sensing, fire and overheat detection, means for air shut-off, and automatic shutdown of non-flight critical systems. An illustration per retrofit of fire detection and suppression systems to Boeing aircraft models, such as the B727 and B737, is shown below. Figure 52: Boeing Fire Detection and Suppression Installation - Retrofit examples for B727 and B737 aircraft models [151]. Detection is mainly based on photoelectric-sensing type systems [152], whereas the mode of operation (detection functionality) depends upon the interference of smoke particles with the light beam inside the detector that then causes the light to scatter onto a photosensitive diode. This in turn increases the current output of the photodiode which Page 62/102

63 results in the generation of an alarm. The smoke detectors (sensors) are categorized either as active or passive, analogous to the manner by which the smoke (to be detected) is brought into the sensor chamber. These are divided into Draw-through type smoked detectors and Open-area type smoke detectors. A Draw-through type sensing system (an active system) consists of draw-through type sensors connected to network of distributed sampling tubes. This is a continuous type monitoring configuration, whereas air samples are drawn from various locations (ports) in the cargo compartment ceiling to the sensors. Figure 53: Draw-through Type Smoke Detection and Sensing [152]. An Open-area type sensing system (a passive system) consists of open-area type smoke detectors that are directly exposed to the environment, and are usually installed in the compartment ceiling. Figure 54: Open-area Type Smoke Detection and example configurations on Class C Lower cargo Compartment (left) and on Class E Main deck Cargo compartment (right) [152]. Fire detection and suppression systems developed and available for retrofit by Fokker Services for its range of aircraft models (Fokker 70, Fokker 100) [153] are similar to the previously aforementioned example, comprising of a photoelectric-based smoke detection system. The modification-retrofit involves the installation of a set of two smoke detectors, in the front and rear cargo compartment. These are located behind the cargo compartment Page 63/102

64 lining for protection. The retrofit modification effort is intensive (500 man-hours, 90 hours total minimum estimated elapsed time), however as the retrofit package is integrated to the existing alerting system of the aircraft there is no further work required concerning the Flight Warning Computer and Multi-Function Display Units software, thus contributing to reduction in overall installation time and costs. Figure 55: Fokker Services Fire Detection System installation example for Fokker 70 / 100 aircraft models [154]. 2.4 Aircraft Cabins Modifications and Modernization Aircraft cabins upgrade projects are probably the most well-known retrofit initiatives and the most profitable on fleet-wide level. In contrast to other known and potential aircraft retrofit segments, cabin retrofit projects can either address costs-savings objectives, revenue-generating objectives, or both (depending on the specific type of cabin modification). The main drives for retrofit initiatives of this type for airlines is to maintain and/or increase the appeal of their offering to passengers (maintain/increase of customer base per offered levels of comfort, travel experience, safety as also additional revenue generation derivative of ever-increasing inflight services), as also through update/replacement of older generation cabin components with up-to-date solutions significant operational cost-savings may be realized over time (fuel-savings through weight reductions and/or power savings, and reductions in maintenance and spares costs from better performance/durability of newer components). The range of existing and possible retrofit solutions for aircraft cabins is very broad and it is not envisaged in the scope of this report to address every possible facet. Focus in this segment is geared towards aircraft cabin retrofit examples that may contribute to the increase aircraft efficiency (either from an operational efficiency or safety point of view), singular new features for passengers not previously available or applicable, and examples indicating the evolution of this market with respect to involvement and offerings developed by Airframe OEMs and Airlines. In-flight Entertainment and Communication (IFEC) is not included in this iteration of the report. Although it is as of recent years becoming a significant financial segment of the aircraft cabin retrofit market (either per offerings for integrated in-seat or portable devices solutions), from identified references on the subject there are no clear indications as to the specific cost and operational factors involved in the selection phase choice by airlines, particularly with respect to choice of either aircraft-to- Page 64/102

65 satellite or aircraft-to-ground solutions, that may influenced to an extent by regional communications infrastructure factors Aircraft Cabin Lighting Retrofit - LED Lighting One of the more interesting current solutions for aircraft cabin retrofit aiming at simultaneous weight, energy, maintenance savings and spare parts reduction is the replacement of conventional cabin lighting systems with LED solutions. Such retrofit replacement programmes are becoming the norm with airlines as the technology is proven to be robust and the installation process is straightforward. An indicative example of such system offering and current airline aircraft-fleet retrofit project is included below, involving Fokker Services (NL) and Austrian Airlines (AT) [154] [155]. The Fokker Services LED cabin lighting retrofit solution has been implemented by the aforementioned airline to a portion of its fleet, i.e., for the Fokker aircraft in its portfolio, but with the added intention (by the airline) to further implement such solutions to other aircraft make and models (non-fokker aircraft) in its fleet. The Fokker Services retrofit package is also to a range of other make and model aircraft such as the Boeing B737, Embraer E-jets series, and Bombardier CRJ series [156]. Figure 56: Fokker LED Lighting system retrofit to Austrian Airlines Fokker aircraft [154]. Further than the aspects related to cabin image and passenger appeal, the main technical and financial benefits that arise from the retrofit of conventional lighting systems with LED lighting systems are: Weight reductions in the cabin, in the range of tens-of-kilograms (disposal of conventional lighting systems sub-parts, e.g., bulbs, etc). Straightforward installation process via utilization of existing power source and outlets. Low maintenance requirements due to increased robustness vs. the previous technology versions, with system reliability times greater than that of conventional systems. Page 65/102

66 Double-digit (%) reductions in electrical consumption and reduction in heat generation (vs. that generated by conventional lighting elements). Based on industry standards, the investment costs for the introduction of the LED-lighting system has a payback period of 1 year. A similar case concerning the development of an LED lighting retrofit package for aircraft cabins retrofit and application to an airline retrofit project, involves EMTEQ (USA). The selection of EMTEQ s cabin LED lighting solution is for retrofit to the Boeing B767 [157] however references to this airline retrofit project do not indicate which airline was involved. It is only stated that the airline that selected this solution is one of the largest operators of Boeing B767 aircraft Aircraft Cabin Environment Improvement Retrofit Cabin environment improvement (temperature, humidity, pressure, noise, vibration, air quality, etc) is an important factor for passenger s well-being (health, fatigue), comfort and flight experience. Solutions addressing different environmental factors improvement or mitigation differ, but retrofit solutions for improvement of cabin environments have been available for some years, such in the cases below concerning cabin environment retrofit solutions for condensation reduction, cooling, and noise reduction (turboprops). For reduction of condensation and improved cabin cooling, two example cases of retrofit solutions are provided by CTT Systems (SE) [158] and Fokker Services (NL) [159] [160], respectively. Regarding CTT Systems, in 2003 USD 0.7 million agreement with Austrian Airlines Group (Austrian Airlines, Tyrolean, Lauda), the company s Zonal Drying System solution was selected for retrofit to the airline group s Bombardier model aircraft (15 Bombardier CRJ regional jets). As of the date of the aforementioned agreement, CTT Systems states that its Zonal Drying System has been purchased by more than 40% of the European operators of Bombardier CRJ -100 and -200 model regional aircraft. The operational and monetary benefits that may be achieved through solutions for reduction/elimination of condensation include improvement in operational reliability of the aircraft and reduction per maintenance and spares costs resulting from the added protection against corrosion and preservation of the aircraft insulation, and also fuel-burn savings are realized as added weight to the aircraft (weight of accumulated water due to condensation), is eliminated. For cabin cooling improvement and systems retrofit, an example of such is available from Fokker Services that was for the Fokker 100 regional jet. The retrofit package developed consist mainly of two modifications, these being a rear cabin air extraction system (RECAES) and the increase of the internal size of the aircraft ground connection (for connection of the air conditioning cart when the aircraft is on the ground). The RECAES facilitates the increase cool air flow in the cabin and the extraction of warm air out of the aircraft, while the increase of the internal size of the aircraft ground connection facilitates increase in kilogram/minute air flow capacity for the ground air conditioning supply by 60% (from 34kg) resulting in faster cabin cooling times. Page 66/102

67 Figure 57: Fokker Services Cabin Cooling System Retrofit Modifications for the Fokker RECAES (left) and Aircraft Ground Connection (right) [160]. With regards to noise reduction and noise cancellation systems, the point of interest here is per noise nuisance for passengers in the 1 to 3 khz frequencies range, particularly for turboprop aircraft. For noise abatement and/or cancellation of low-to-medium frequency noise in turboprop cabins, passive solutions (panels, liners) are known not to be effective with respect to weight, size, performance, and cost. In such cases it has been proven through research, including in more than several EC - funded aeronautics projects ranging as far back as the ASANCA projects (ASANCA I, ASANCA II) from the early 1990 s (that included airframe OEMs Dornier, Fokker, and SAAB at a time that they were still manufacturing aircraft) [161] to more recent projects in the 6 th and 7 th Framework Programmes [162] [163], that active solutions (comprising of electrical and electronic means) are more effective for this purpose ( active meaning the manner by which noise is reduced/cancelled via the interaction superposition of noise waves with anti-noise waves generated by the active control system). Per this preamble, retrofit solutions for active noise control (ANC) systems (as per similar and combined systems such as active vibration control AVC and combined active vibration and noise control AVNC), do exist and are still applied today for aircraft retrofits, such as in the case of the ANC retrofit package developed by Ultra Electronics Controls (UK) [164]. In 2009, Ultra announced the 1000 th delivery of its ANC system retrofit solution. For the specific type of system in this case essentially the noise abatement in the cabin is achieved with active tuned vibration absorbers attached to the fuselage frames, for absorption of vibrations against the fuselage caused by the beating of the air from the propeller blades. Ultra Electronics Controls states [165] that its AVNC solutions are used on all Bombardier Q-series turboprops, the Saab 340 and 2000 turboprops, the Beech King Air 350 turboprop, and on the Bombardier 601 and 604 business jets. Page 67/102

68 Figure 58: Illustrations of fundamental Active Noise Control principal (left) and representation of cabin noise mapping with and without AVNC system operation (right) [165] Aircraft Cabin In-seat Power Retrofit In-seat Power With the allowance of the use of personal portable devices by passengers in-flight, e.g., laptops, tablets, ipads, and other mobile devices, a practical issue that eventually developed by popular demand of passengers is to have the ability to charge device batteries in-flight. Although batteries of portable and personal devices are sufficient for work or entertainment purposes during short-to-medium haul flights (up to 3 hours approximately), for longer flight segments they are not sufficient. Solutions for this demand are available and examples provided below, but in this case the issue is one of trade-off between passenger needs - passenger offering vs. safety, as the power allowance for in-seat power systems is taken from the overall aircraft power available, a significant portion of which is required for the essential aircraft control and management systems. For such safety considerations mitigation measures have been taken into account in newer aircraft, such as the Boeing B787, whereas prioritized and compartmentalized network protection features are in-built as power management/distribution is administered on multiple levels [166], thereby preventing for instance situations of demand overload on the aircraft generators under different loaddemand and availability conditions. The trade-off consideration is the important factor here as points to the issue of which aircraft (design-wise) can accommodate provision of in-seat power, rather than the appeal of retrofit of in-seat power. As to whether in-seat power provision is a strong candidate for the aircraft retrofit market, this is taken as given considering that 55% to 60% of in-seat power provision market is done through retrofits rather than through line-fits [166]. One example of in-seat power installation by an airline involves Astronics Corporation (USA) and Iberia Airlines (ES) [167], whereas in a 2011 undisclosed agreement will install Page 68/102

69 Astronics EmPower In-seat power system to the economy class sections of 7 Airbus A wide-body aircraft, further complementing EmPower In-seat power systems installations in business class sections. The economy class configuration of the aircraft to be upgraded is 267 seats/aircraft. Main features of the in-seat power system in question include to 200VA per passenger, integrated AC and USB outlet unit, and USB power outputs. Astronics EmPower In-seat power system offerings are applicable to Airbus, Boeing, Embraer and other airframe OEMs aircraft, and according to Astronics are employed by over 140 airline/oem customers on over 500,000 seats [168]. Figure 59: EmPower In-Seat Power Supply (top) and Inflight Power With Integrated Seat Power (bottom) systems [169] [170]. Another example of in-seat power systems development and availability for aircraft cabin upgrades is offered by KID-SYSTEME (DE), a 100% owned subsidiary of Airbus. The offered SKYpower product is an 110V AC in-seat power system with RS-485 interfaces (drivers and receivers electrical characteristics standard for use in balanced digital multipoint systems) and Ethernet for communication with IFE systems [171]. Page 69/102

70 Figure 60: KID-SYSTEME SKYpower In-seat Power Supply system [171]. The SKYpower In-seat power system offerings are applicable to Airbus, Boeing, Embraer aircraft models (all Airbus models, Boeing B737/757/767/777/747 models, Embraer EMB170 and ERJ 174/190 models). According to source SKYpower is fitted in 130,000 seats worldwide across 57 aircraft operators Aircraft Cabin Modernization Programmes - Airframe OEMs & Vendors Up to the last years, most cabin modernization innovations and solutions for replacement of main cabin elements such as seats, luggage bins, upholsteries, carpeting, galley equipment, lighting etc, were brought to the market by well-established dedicated supplier entities. These suppliers still have the majority of the cabin retrofit market, however as of recent (the past few years) airframe OEMs have now also entered the market with signature all-inclusive cabin modernization packages derivative of own development programmes (or at the least developed in very close cooperation with a selected supplier). In addition, airlines have also entered the area through strategic joint-development initiatives (on airlines alliance level) for development of generic cabin solutions and equipments for their airline member s aircraft. In following, examples of cabin retrofit programmes and packages by airframe OEMs and airlines are provided. Airframe OEM - BOEING In 2009, Boeing introduced the Sky Interior cabin retrofit package for the B737 NGseries aircraft models [172] [173]. The Sky Interior package includes a range of upgrade items, main features being LED lighting for cabin and reading lighting, new design contoured overhead luggage bins that pivot up out of the way (do not block space in the aisle when being loaded thus facilitating passenger passage) with increased baggage storage capacity (thus freeing space under seats to increase passenger comfort through more legroom), and improved cabin noise-level performance (approximately 2dB improvement in cabin noise levels) resultant of revised interior placements of noise dampening materials and a new return air grill Page 70/102

71 design. In order to reduce installation time and costs, as the Sky Interior is intended for upgrade of B /800/900 NG cabins, the package was designed to be fitted using the same configuration and installation points that are already present in these aircraft. Figure 61: Boeing Sky Interior Cabin B737 Upgrade package [173]. According to source [173] the Boeing B737 Sky Interior is on order by 45 aircraft operators corresponding in excess of 1,100 B737 aircraft. Airframe OEM - AIRBUS In a different direction, Airbus has pursued the development and implementation of a new cabin catering concept named SPICE (SPace Innovative Catering Equipment), to modernize cabin galley philosophy and technology (that contribute to aircraft weight and energy requirements) [172] [174]. The SPICE concept aims to provide new galley design, equipment, and operational solutions in order to increase space and address weight, energy and waste penalty issues that are associated with current galley infrastructure, the philosophy of which have not changed significantly over the past decades. Apart from innovations that concern new trolley concepts and designs (addressing significant weight and stowage issues), the main features of interest here are the under development solutions for galley improvement and galley flexibility, that include: Cabin space savings through modular design of the galley, e.g., extra space created could be used for introduction of additional seats, Page 71/102

72 Plug & Play galley equipment facilitating airlines to implement route specific menus, Equipment to segregate waste for implementing recycling initiatives. With the range of changes (to conventional galley concept) and solutions under development, it is estimated that implementation of SPICE may result in kg in weight savings on a typical wide-body aircraft with passenger capacity. Airframe OEM - ATR Figure 62: Airbus SPICE Galley concept [174]. An interesting case and strategy for turboprop cabin retrofit solutions involves the turboprop manufacturer ATR, with respect to the ARMONIA cabin design concept and the ATR series turboprop [175] [176]. Figure 63: ATR-600 series (left) and the ATR (right) Turboprops [176]. ATR recently announced (2011) that it is offering the ARMONIA cabin interior for linefit (to new aircraft orders) and for retrofit to the -500 series turboprop. Currently five ATR s are being line-fitted with this option for customer Wings Air (ID). Page 72/102

73 Figure 64: ARMONIA Cabin Interior for ATR-600 series and ATR (linefit or retrofit) [175] [177]. The aspect of interest here is that the ARMONIA cabin interior package was originally designed for the latest ATR turboprop aircraft model, the ATR-600 series. This cabin concept and designed was developed in close cooperation with Italian design house, and main features included are LED lighting, new luggage bins and new side panels and newer slim passenger seats for greater knee clearance of passengers. Airline Alliances - Lufthansa Star Alliance From references [178] [179] it has been identified that members of Lufthansa Star Alliance had embarked some years ago on a joint-development programme for the development and evaluation of a common economy seat architecture design for their long-haul flight aircraft, with first deliveries and installations to be implemented in The overall aim behind this unique development collaboration-alliance was to create a standardized economy-class seat architecture (with the associated procurement, common maintenance, and interoperability benefits), but with the additional possibility for airline members to choose the distinctive/brand/functionality features of these seats, i.e., seat cushions, upholstery colors, and IFE system. According to source [179], the common architecture seat will include carbon-fiber components to contribute to seat weight reduction goals. The cabin specialist OEM B/E Aerospace (USA) has been selected by Star Alliance to develop and deliver the final common architecture seat to the alliance members, the first of which will be delivered to Lufthansa (DE), Austrian Airlines (AT), and Air China (CN). Figure 65: Star Alliance B/E Aerospace common long-haul economy seat [178]. Page 73/102

74 2.4.5 Advanced Cabin Management Systems Retrofit With advances in micro-technology (sensors, controls), software, wireless communications and electronics (portable, personal devices), there is now a new trend emerging for more flexible and personal Cabin Management Systems (CMS) and solutions, that are targeted not only for new aircraft but for retrofit to in-service and ageing aircraft. Although at this time some advanced solutions that have recently come to market have their first uptake for premium offerings of airlines (business class) and in the business aviation sector, such solutions are applicable (technology-wise) for wider use in aircraft. The additional interesting feature with respect to retrofit and benefits thereof is the use of personal devices for remote control of CMS (hence no wiring needed) and the ability for even passengers to control their environment and in-flight experience (further than in-flight entertainment). A first example concerning CMS and retrofit to an out-of-production aircraft model (2011), is the Rockwell Collins (USA) Venue Cabin Management System [179]. The Rockwell Collins CMS solution was installed on two Dornier 328 aircraft (business jet version). The remote control capability of the Venue Cabin Management System is offered through dedicated software application for ipod touch, iphone, and ipad devices, that allows for dynamic recognition of the aircraft cabin CMS configuration, i.e., for use of remote devices in different aircraft that have this CMS installed, and configures the available controls accordingly. Figure 66: Rockwell Collins Venue Cabin Remote App for ipod touch, iphone, and ipad [180]. A further example for CMS and retrofit (for current and out-of-production aircraft models) comes from Flight Display Systems (USA) that offers it s customizable CMS for aircraft retrofit [181]. Some of the aircraft types and models to which SelectCMS CMS has been installed or retrofitted include the Airbus A319 (corporate jet version), the Boeing B737 and B757, and the McDonnell Douglas MD-81 and MD87. The Flight Displays Systems Select CMS also features Bluetooth-based remote control so that passengers may control cabin functions from Android-equipped mobile phone or tablet computer, such as lighting, window shades and in-flight entertainment systems [182]. Page 74/102

75 Figure 67: Flight Displays Systems Select CMS Archos 7 tablet with Android CMS software [182]. A final reference for advanced CMS solutions applicable for aircraft retrofit, in this instance developed and offered by an airline, is the recently introduced nice modular and flexible Ethernet (IP) based cabin management and In-flight Entertainment System, by Lufthansa Technik [183] [184]. This CMS development and offering is the evolution of the original nice CMS of Lufthansa Technik, and utilizes the same wireless and wired Ethernet technology as the latter CMS that is already in use in over 200 aircraft that include Airbus and Boeing aircraft models (mainly corporate jet versions). This commonality allows for easier and more flexible upgrade of the existing CMS in use to the new version CMS. The CMS enables passengers to control cabin functions, e.g., such as lighting, environmental control, entertainment systems, camera systems, etc. Figure 68: Lufthansa Technik nice HD modular and flexible Ethernet (IP) based Cabin Management and In-flight Entertainment system [184]. 2.5 Aircraft Health Monitoring and Management Solutions Retrofit With respect to the topic of aircraft retrofit, and in particular per continued use of ageing or out-of-production airframes, solutions for aircraft and equipment monitoring and management are a given issue, from continued operational safety and financial/logistics points of view (maintenance, spares costs). A range of applications is available for such Page 75/102

76 purposes and indicative references to current and potentially probable solutions from current development initiatives are provided Aircraft Monitoring Systems - Airframe OEM and Independent Supplier BOEING AHM - Airplane Health Management system Development of this in-flight health management system by Boeing started in 2003 in cooperation with several airline partners including American Airlines (USA), Japan Airlines (JP), Air France (FR), and Singapore Airlines (SG) [185]. The AHM system has been fielded for a number of Boeing aircraft models, e.g., B737 NG, B757, B767, B777, B and the out-of-production McDonnell Douglas MD11. At that time of publication it is stated that around 50% of in-service B s and MD-11s utilize the Boeing AHM system. Indicative examples of fleet-level retrofits of the Boeing AHM include retrofit cases by freighter and commercial aircraft operators. In 2011 the freighter aircraft operator UPS (USA) concluded an agreement with Boeing to equip 38 McDonnell Douglas MD-11 freighter aircraft with the AHM system [186]. Specifically the agreement covered the retrofitting of the Boeing AHM system to the aforementioned aircraft and also to 13 Boeing B freighter aircraft. For retrofit to commercial aircraft, in 2009 Air China (CN) selected the Boeing AHM system for retrofit and line-fit to a combined number of 117 in-service and on-order B737 NGs, and at the time of publication (2010) 40 of Air China s B737 NGs had been equipped with the system [187]. Further to the example of Air China, in 2010 British Airways (UK) concluded an initial 5 year agreement with Boeing to implement the AHM system to the airline s 50 Boeing B747s and 46 (+6 on order) B777s [188]. The AHM system hardware consists mainly of an Aircraft Condition Monitoring System (ACMS) that is supplied by Teledyne Technologies Incorporated (USA) that collects in-flight data and applies the AHM logic (processing) from which reports are generated. AHM system reports are transmitted to ground control stations at pre-determined intervals and when faults are detected, via the Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS). Originally the Boeing AHM system transmitted reports via the aircraft s data link as previous implementations were for aircraft equipped with a Central Maintenance Computer (CMC). Through recent agreement with Teledyne, the Boeing's AHM system is also implemented with the Teledyne Digital Flight Data Acquisition Unit (DFDAU) that uses ACARS network for communication. Specifically, the DFDAU incorporates an ACMS that performs the functions of the aforementioned central maintenance computer and provides the data input to the AHM software framework for diagnostic, prognostic and trending processing functions. AIT - Automated Identification Technology Retrofit Package Page 76/102

77 In 2010 Boeing and Fujitsu announced their collaboration for the development of automated identification technology (AIT) packages, termed as the Component Management Optimization (CMO) system, applicable by retrofit on any make and type of commercial aircraft [189] [190]. The AIT system concept, based mainly on combination of radio-frequency identification tags (RFID) and Contact Memory Buttons, addresses the development of an automated identification system for inventory, monitoring and management of airline parts, components and equipment. RFID tags can store information that can be retrieved when remotely queried for instance by portable tag readers, and in this case an RFID tag may store such information as the serial number, manufacturing, and repair history of aircraft components. Contact Memory Buttons [191] [192] are electronic storage devices similar to but more rugged than RFID tags, that can be physically attached (and removed) to equipment or surfaces, and have increased data storage capacity. More commonly used in the defense sector, the first instance of use on commercial aircraft will be through the Boeing CMO system offering. The AIT / CMO system concept originated from a request to Boeing 5 years earlier by Japan Airlines (JP) for a solution to expedite the process of inventory and inspection (for potential damage) of passenger life vests stowed under the aircraft seats during overnight line checks; the solution that was pursued at the time was the development of an application involving the incorporation of RFID chips in the life vests that could be queried for status reports (item identification, status, history, etc info) by technicians with hand-held tag readers, and Boeing looked to Fujitsu to assist in the development of the required embedded software for the RFID chips. Although Japan Airlines was the instigator for the development of first AIT package, it ultimately did not participate in development or testing activities taking place during the period of economic downturn in the airline sector (2008/2009). This position was taken up by another carrier, Alaska Airlines (USA), in agreement with Boeing in early CMO system package options envisaged to be offered by Boeing will cover five potential applications, such as for: 1) Emergency Equipment Management (e.g., life jackets, oxygen generators, other kinds of airborne emergency equipment). According to Boeing, with a USD $200,000-$250,000 expenditure by an airline for deployment of this option to a fleet 40 Boeing B777 s (e.g., for life jackets), the estimated annual savings in labor costs could be up to USD $1 million [189]. 2) Rotable Management (e.g., for starter generators, APUs), 3) Structural Rotables (e.g., for fuselage doors, flaps, landing gear doors), 4) Repairables Management (for non-serialized parts), 5) Structural repairs and airframe degradation management (e.g., for corrosion control and prevention programs, reduced vertical separation minimum -RVSM aerodynamics). Page 77/102

78 Figure 69: Example Boeing - Fujitsu Automated Identification Technology (AIT) options for Life-jackets - RFID tags (left) and Structural Rotables - Contact Memory Buttons (right) [188] [191]. In mid-2011 it was announced that American Airlines (USA) became the first airline to adopt the CMO system for fleet-wide retrofit within the next four years [191]. Specifically the airline will deploy the CMO system solution for monitoring and management of replaceable structural components of their aircraft, e.g., fuselage doors, wing stabilizers, rudders and elevators, on which Contact Memory Buttons will be attached during scheduled aircraft heavy maintenance. The first aircraft types that will be fitted with the CMO solution are the airline s Boeing B777 s and B s. For the B , it is indicated that the CMO system solution implementation to chosen replaceable structural components requires the fitting of 30 contact memory buttons. At present 5 Boeing B777 s have been fitted with the CMO system solution, and up to 5 B s will have also have been fitted with the solution by end For other and older aircraft types of the American Airlines fleet, i.e., the Boeing B767 and the B757, implementation of the CMO system retrofit will require longer time leads as required component serial numbers were not included in the aircraft delivery documentations. Technical personnel will be able to retrieve faster a range of useful information on aircraft structural components when scanning the contact memory buttons, such as whether a component is indigenous to the specific aircraft or is a replacement component taken from another aircraft, the use/time history of component - traceable to specific aircraft the component has been used on, and damage history upon which inspection frequency and/or actions will be indicated. Fitting of the CMO system solution is a two stage process, whereas first airline technical personnel perform a general visual inspection of each aircraft to check for damages on the structural components of interest and the information on their data tags (manufacturing part number, serial number), and subsequently the information gathered from the various components are uploaded to contact memory buttons that are then fitted to the specific structural component they correspond to, i.e., per the information uploaded to the devices. The fitting process is completed by inspection of the aircraft by quality inspectors for verification that contact memory buttons are fitted to the correct structural components. According to the findings of the first fitting of the CMO system solution to a B777, the general inspection process took approximately 1.5 hours, while the preparation, fitting and end inspection of the contact memory buttons installation process took almost 2 hours. Page 78/102

79 The airline intends to reduce the time for the entire process to approximately 2 hours. An added benefit of the CMO system solution retrofit is that it facilitates compliance with an FAA Part 121 supplemental inspection rule for airplane structures that could crack (CFR ). WAIC - Wireless Avionics Intra Communications Although not available as yet for aircraft, a current partnership development initiative presented in 2011 by Boeing is provided here, as the potential applicability of the technology in question for retrofitting aircraft is very probable. As with all health monitoring applications, there is a substantial amount of wiring involved that adds to overall system complexity and costs, e.g., routing, power, maintenance issues, as also negative contribution to aircraft fuel-burn performance due to added weight. With the continuous increase of use and development of applications that use wireless communications modes for data exchange (IFE, IFEC systems for passengers, etc), in the recent decade there has been a drive in the research community for RTD aiming at aircraft health monitoring solutions that utilize wireless communication modes for data transfer (thus reducing or eliminating the need for wiring). One such initiative concerns the potential use of Wireless Avionics Intra Communications, or WAIC [193]. Based on short-range radio technology, it is primarily intended at present for safety-related closed-network low-data rate monitoring applications. Per the publication, ideal first case applications of WAIC technology for aircraft health monitoring would be for aircraft cabin sensing networks, e.g., for temperature, pressure, humidity, smoke, EMI detection, as also potentially for emergency systems (e.g., lighting), corrosion and structural health monitoring. However, per the WAIC development presentation [194] the technology is also envisaged to be later applicable for aircraft exterior components and structures monitoring systems and networks, as also for high-data rate monitoring applications (whether internal or external to the aircraft). Figure 70: Summary characteristics of Wireless Avionics Intra Communications [193]. Page 79/102

80 Airbus is also reported to be involved in RTD for WAIC technology development and application, as indicated by publication in 2010 [195], whereas it is stated that the airframer has had several research collaborations with the Fraunhofer Institute for Telecommunications (DE) for deployment of low rate WAIC technology for sensor and crew communication applications, as also for deployment of 60 GHz technology for wireless IFE applications. EMBRAER AHEAD - Aircraft Health Analysis and Diagnostics The Brazilian airframe OEM Embraer introduced this aircraft health monitoring system in 2006 for its range of E-Jets [196]. The AHEAD monitors approximately 15,000 data parameters (from flight controls, avionics, hydraulics, landing gear, other major systems), and the aircraft Central Maintenance Computer can generate up to 4,000 fault messages per incidences detected from the collected data that are automatically transmitted by the CMC to either the aircraft operator s designated maintenance centers or to Embraer in Brazil. More than several carriers employ the AHEAD system, and since its introduction in 2006 the number of flight delays, interruptions or cancellation have been reduced by up to 30%. In 2011, Embraer announced that a newer version of the AHEAD aircraft health monitoring system would be available for retrofit to in-service private and business jets through retrofit, i.e., the Phenom 100 / 300 series, as the already in-service aircraft already have the necessary pre-wiring for the system installation as also the required CMC [185]. Although private and business jets are not in the scope of the RETROFIT project, this example is included as vital statistics per the implementation of such a system to aircraft are available and indicative for assumptions for corresponding figures for implementation of the AHEAD system to the larger commercial E-Jets models. The AHEAD system for the Phenom series (and for the Legacy series aircraft to be delivered in 2013) was developed in collaboration with Garmin Ltd (USA) that provides the hardware for the aircraft health monitoring system. The hardware provided by Garmin for the AHEAD system includes a Garmin data-link box and a satellite-based flight telephone (Iridium). Data gathered by the system may either be downloaded when the aircraft is on the ground (on landing) or in-flight through the Garmin provided Iridium flight telephone (transmitted data are directed via Iridium to Garmin which in forwards the information to the appropriate receiver). Costs for implementation of the AHEAD system to the aforementioned Phenom private/business jet models include approximately USD $50,000 for the Garmin hardware and an annual cycles-based data transmission fee for the Iridium satellite-based communication option, e.g., USD $2,600 for up to 300 cycles/year. For the option of data tracking from the ground without the capability of in-flight data transmission, the annual fee is USD $1,100. Aeromechanical Services Ltd AFIRS - Automated Flight Information Reporting System Page 80/102

81 The AFIRS solution, developed by Aeromechanical Services Ltd. (CAN) and marketed as FLYHT, is an aircraft health monitoring solution designed for both linefit and retrofit to aircraft [185]. AFIRS monitors the digitized data from the digital data buses of an aircraft, the data feed to the Flight Data Recorder (FDR), and from the Full Authority Digital Engine Controls (FADEC). For data communication, the AFIRS solution either transmits information through the Iridium satellite-based communication network or through bulk transfer of data upon landing. The AFIRS box (Figure 71) [197] also serves as an Iridium phone system. Figure 71: Basic Automated Flight Information Reporting System (AFIRS) components [197]. For retrofit of the AFIRS solution to ageing airframes with analog data infrastructure, the AFIRS solution would be accompanied by analog-to-digital data converters that are available from a range of suppliers. Typical implementation cost of the AFIRS solution (with Iridium antenna and wiring) is approximately USD $50,000, and the AFIRS support service fees together with the Iridium communication fees are from USD $10 to $20 per hour. For aircraft data streaming in emergency situations, there is a substantial increase in per hour fees ranging from USD $180 to $300. Page 81/102

82 Figure 72: AFIRS Aircraft Certification Status as of September 2007 [197]. Recent references for retrofit of the AFIRS solution retrofit in autumn 2011 include system retrofit for an out of-of-production aircraft model and current in-production aircraft models, operated by two Nigerian commercial air carriers. Specifically, in November this year Aeromechanical Services Ltd. concluded a deal for a 5-year equipment and services contract with one of the aforementioned airlines from Nigeria for retrofit of the AFIRS solution (AFIRS 220) to 6 Fokker 100 aircraft [198], valued at approximately USD $855,240. Two months earlier Aeromechanical Services had concluded a deal for another 5-year equipment and services contract (with the other of the two aforementioned airlines from Nigeria) for retrofit of the AFIRS solution (AFIRS 220) to five of the airline s aircraft (a combination of Boeing B747s and B767s), valued at approximately USD $440,000 [199]. Page 82/102

83 Figure 73: AFIRS Aircraft under Contract as of September 2007 [197]. 2.6 Aircraft Avionics Retrofit Retrofit of aircraft avionics, whether partial or complete, by choice or by aviation authorities mandates is one of the largest, long-running areas of the aircraft retrofit market together with aircraft cabin retrofits. This is primarily due to the fact that aircraft must comply or be flexible to comply (flightdeck technology) with constantly changing Air Traffic Control (ATC) requirements and future frameworks, i.e., Single European Sky ATM Research SESAR (EU) [200] and Next Generation Air Transportation System NextGen (USA) [201]. The range of available options and equipment for flightdeck upgrades through retrofit is quite broad, with such items being integrated as flat-panel displays, new Flight Management Systems (FMS), new data recorders, Head-Up Displays (HUDS) Synthetic / Enhanced Vision Systems (3D graphical display of terrain ahead for pilot situational awareness or flight into controlled terrain in any visual or weather conditions), Electronic Flight Bags (EFB), real-time weather graphics, terrain awareness warning systems, satellite-based communications, and the list goes on. According to 2011 source [202], in 2009 airlines invested approximately USD $327.3 million on avionics upgrades, excluding parts and services, and is estimated that per steady growth in the aircraft retrofit market, the avionics retrofit segment in 2012 will reach USD $672.6 million and USD $804.2 million by Indicatively for 2009 airlines invested USD $112 million and USD $82 million on communications and navigation upgrades, respectively. Although there are numerous instances to be found concerning different aircraft avionics retrofits, especially with regards to the Boeing aircraft models, e.g., B737- Page 83/102

84 100/200/300/400 Classic, B757, B767 series, and emerging solutions through the SESAR and NextGen international ATC initiatives, in this section per the scope of RETROFIT a few select cases of avionics retrofits to ageing and out-of-production aircraft models are provided, as also reference to potential new application of avionics technology to be fielded in the near term that may be applicable for retrofit to a range of in-service aircraft Flightdeck-level Retrofits for Ageing and Out-of-Production Aircraft Douglas DC-9 Flightdeck Retrofit In 2011 Airborne Maintenance and Engineering Services (USA) received an STC from the FAA for their Douglas DC-9 retrofit project [203]. The 12-month development project, under contract from a private owner of a VIP-converted Douglas DC-9 (Figure 7 left), aimed to develop an integrated retrofit solution to upgrade the analog flightdeck of this long time out-of-production aircraft to be compatible with upcoming NextGen requirements, using commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment. After extensive consultations with system suppliers over a 9-month period, final features comprising the FAA approved retrofit package include: 10-inch flat panel displays. Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) compliant Air Data modules (replacing the previous duplex altimeter system of the aircraft) Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) FMS for primary navigation and Localizer Performance with Vertical (LPV) guidance approach capabilities, with Ethernet-based data transfer. The FMS is interfaced with the aircraft s existing analog autopilot system and flight director. This required a pre-modification as the analog autopilot system and flight director where not connected previously, and integration of the two required external switching and approximately 8 miles of wiring. Electronic Standby Instrument system for visual display of altitude with slip and skid information on color Liquid Crystal Display (LCD). Audio Control Panel for addition of digital radio features for service interphone, calls, and aural warnings from the Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS), the Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS), and the Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS) to the DC-9 analog system. New Radio Unit Class 3 EFBs Broadcast datalink receiver with connection to satellite communication network. Page 84/102

85 Figure 74: Airborne Maintenance and Engineering Services DC-9 NextGen compatible Flightdeck Retrofit [203]. Bombardier Dash-8 Flightdeck Retrofit In 2011 Field Aviation (CAN) completed the first major flight deck for the Bombardier Dash-8 Classic turboprop, i.e., models Dash-8 100/200/300, for the Icelandic Coastguard (IS). The retrofit package, although developed initially for Bombardier Dash-8 in maritime surveillance role, is also applicable and offered as a complete retrofit kit for commercial transport Dash-8 Classics [204] [205]. The developed flightdeck retrofit package was developed in collaboration with AMETEK (USA) and Universal Avionics (USA), whereas the former provided a dual channel engine interface and the latter provided flat panel displays (5 in total) with the associated interface software. Figure 75: Bombardier Dash (left) and Dash (right) series turboprop aircraft [206]. The main features of the flightdeck upgrade for this turboprop model are the aforementioned 5 high definition LCD flat panel displays, four of which are for presentation of navigation information and the last one which is the center display presents the engine information. The system allows for information to be switched between displays, and incorporates a modular upgrade path for additional later visual upgrade features, e.g., for charts, checklists, satellite weather information, synthetic vision, etc. Page 85/102