(NSI News Source Info) May 9, 2009: Airbus A400M engine maker Europrop International has admitted it blundered in the development of a vital computer system by failing to produce the correct paperwork to allow the power plant to be certified to the required civil standards. 
The first A400M should have been delivered later this year to France. (EADS). The A400M (formerly known as the future large aircraft) is a military transporter designed to meet the requirements of the air forces of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom.
A European staff target was drawn up in 1993, together with a memorandum of understanding signed by the governments of the seven nations. Italy subsequently withdrew from the programme. Airbus Military SL of Madrid, a subsidiary of Airbus Industrie, is responsible for management of the A400M programme.
Other companies with a share in the programme are: BAE Systems (UK), EADS (Germany, France and Spain), Flabel (Belgium) and Tusas Aerospace Industries (Turkey). Final assembly will take place in Seville, Spain.
In May 2003, a development and production contact was signed between Airbus and OCCAR, the European procurements agency for 180 aircraft: Belgium seven, France 50, Germany 60, Luxembourg one, Spain 27, Turkey ten and the UK 25 aircraft. First metal cut for the airframe of A400M was in January 2005 and final assembly began in August 2007. The first aircraft was rolled out in June 2008 and was scheduled to make its maiden flight in late 2008. However problems with the propulsion system have resulted in a delay and first flight is expected in the second half of 2009. First deliveries to the French Air Force are planned for late 2010. Deliveries are expected to conclude in 2025.
EPI president Nick Durham said the company only realized last year that the paper trail required for the full authority digital engine control (FADEC) was OK for military approval but not the civil requirements agreed to in the contract with Airbus.
"The problem came from having to demonstrate to the European Aviation Safety Authority traceability through the development cycles. When we sat down with them late summer last year, it was clear to us and them that actually, whilst everything worked, we couldn't clearly show that," Durham said.
Durham attributed the error to "the pressure of the moment."
"We didn't intentionally go down this route. The organizations involved in normal military programs work in a slightly different way to validate the software by operation and I think what happened was people kept to those processes under the pressure rather than move to the civil certification processes we had agreed to. It's a matter of what you do up front and what you do later," he said.
The A400M deal with EPI to develop the TP400 engine was signed in 2003; the first aircraft was originally planned to be delivered to the lead customer this year.
The FADEC issue is one of a string of problems that have forced Airbus to repeatedly delay the airlifter's first flight. The A400M now faces at least a three-year delay, which threatens to cost Airbus parent EADS 1.4 billion euros ($1.9 billion) in late delivery payments.
The first A400M was rolled out at the Seville, Spain, factory of Airbus Military in mid-2008 but has been grounded while the engine certification and a series of problems with a C-130 engine flying test bed were resolved.
The seven partner nations in the project have a contract clause allowing them to cancel the aircraft order at the end of March. A three-month moratorium is in place as the two sides negotiate possible changes to technical and economic aspects of the fixed price agreement to save the project being derailed or even possibly canceled.
Talking to reporters in Seville, the EPI boss said the company had to virtually develop from scratch the complex software required to control the aircraft's propulsion system.
Durham said EASA is scheduled to do a formal audit on the software system this summer with full engine certification targeted for late 2009.
EPI is a four-nation consortium formed to develop and build the turboprop engine. MTU of Germany, Britain's Rolls-Royce, Safran of France and IPT of Spain are the shareholders.
MTU is the lead nation on the FADEC element of the engine.
Durham said EPI had had to draft in a lot of the best people from across the European partners to resolve the problem, causing other development programs to be "sacrificed." The FADEC workforce had been "more than trebled" to over 200 engineers, he said.
The EPI boss said that at the time of the decision not to proceed with the flight test program, the FADEC system was functional, had the required paper trail for military approval, and had operated for over 2,000 hours on the engine-test bed.
Asked why, in light of the fact the A400M program was already facing delays, the decision had not been taken to develop the traceable software in parallel with the flight test program and grant a waiver for the military-approved system to be used, Durham said he wasn't the right person to say.
"We had to come through with a traceable engine sooner or later and to demonstrate we had it right and give the customer [Airbus] confidence we had it right. Working with the customer we decided this was the best solution," Durham said.
In a statement, Airbus said the lack of certification of the FADEC, as required by EASA, meant they were not in a position to perform first or subsequent flights.
"There is first a civil certification through EASA, and then a "military certification and qualification" which is for the more military specific aspects of the power-plant - airframe combination and utilization such as resistance to gravel and bullets.
EASA grants the stamp for first flight as A400M MSN1 [a test aircraft] will be operated under civil registration. Before granting it, EASA wants to have the assurance that it is safe for the airframe/engine combination to take-off.
In the case of the FADEC software, which is complex integrated software, the minimum assurance is to show compliance to DO178B certification process and as a first step, demonstrate traceability of top level requirements in the software development process," said the statement.
The first aircraft should have been delivered later this year to France, which along with Germany, Spain and the U.K. are the leading members of a seven-nation partnership who signed a fixed price development deal with Airbus to develop the airlifter in 2003.
Along with export contracts with Malaysia and South Africa total orders currently stand at 192 aircraft.
With deliveries slipping at least three years, EADS is seeking to avoid picking up the entire late payments cost, which is threatening to total more than 1.4 billion euros.
As part of their case, company executives have complained recently that the EPI consortium was not their choice but a politically inspired selection to keep jobs and technology in Europe rather than allow the work to go to rival North American bidder Pratt & Whitney.
Durham defended EPI in Seville, saying that the TP400 was chosen not just as a result of European pressure but also because it was a cost-competitive proposal.
Airbus boss Tom Enders said earlier this year the first aircraft could have flown by last October if they had the engine.
Durham said that despite the FADEC setbacks the 2,600 hours of running on test rigs and 25 hours on the flying test bed showed good results.
About 90 percent of development testing is now complete and work is now underway to complete installation of instrumentation on the test engines for MSN1 with the aim of starting ground running tests this summer.
A Hercules C-130 flying test bed operated by British company Marshall Aerospace has been operating with a TP400 replacing one of the four engines since late last year.
The engine has operated at 70 percent of take-off power and will shortly move to takeoff at full power, said Durham.
"Engine performance and weight results pretty much meet our wildest dreams. At take-off and cruise we are meeting maximum temperature margins, fuel consumption is at specification and in-flight restarts are working," he said.
Although A400M is known to be heavily overweight, Durham said the engine weight is within 1 percent of specification.
"That's pretty unusual at this stage of engine development. If the performance we have seen so far is backed up on the flight test program, it is so good it suggests we will be able to take out a bit more weight with modifications in the future."
The first A400M should have been delivered later this year to France. (EADS). The A400M (formerly known as the future large aircraft) is a military transporter designed to meet the requirements of the air forces of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom.
A European staff target was drawn up in 1993, together with a memorandum of understanding signed by the governments of the seven nations. Italy subsequently withdrew from the programme. Airbus Military SL of Madrid, a subsidiary of Airbus Industrie, is responsible for management of the A400M programme.
Other companies with a share in the programme are: BAE Systems (UK), EADS (Germany, France and Spain), Flabel (Belgium) and Tusas Aerospace Industries (Turkey). Final assembly will take place in Seville, Spain.
In May 2003, a development and production contact was signed between Airbus and OCCAR, the European procurements agency for 180 aircraft: Belgium seven, France 50, Germany 60, Luxembourg one, Spain 27, Turkey ten and the UK 25 aircraft. First metal cut for the airframe of A400M was in January 2005 and final assembly began in August 2007. The first aircraft was rolled out in June 2008 and was scheduled to make its maiden flight in late 2008. However problems with the propulsion system have resulted in a delay and first flight is expected in the second half of 2009. First deliveries to the French Air Force are planned for late 2010. Deliveries are expected to conclude in 2025.
EPI president Nick Durham said the company only realized last year that the paper trail required for the full authority digital engine control (FADEC) was OK for military approval but not the civil requirements agreed to in the contract with Airbus.
"The problem came from having to demonstrate to the European Aviation Safety Authority traceability through the development cycles. When we sat down with them late summer last year, it was clear to us and them that actually, whilst everything worked, we couldn't clearly show that," Durham said.
Durham attributed the error to "the pressure of the moment."
"We didn't intentionally go down this route. The organizations involved in normal military programs work in a slightly different way to validate the software by operation and I think what happened was people kept to those processes under the pressure rather than move to the civil certification processes we had agreed to. It's a matter of what you do up front and what you do later," he said.
The A400M deal with EPI to develop the TP400 engine was signed in 2003; the first aircraft was originally planned to be delivered to the lead customer this year.
The FADEC issue is one of a string of problems that have forced Airbus to repeatedly delay the airlifter's first flight. The A400M now faces at least a three-year delay, which threatens to cost Airbus parent EADS 1.4 billion euros ($1.9 billion) in late delivery payments.
The first A400M was rolled out at the Seville, Spain, factory of Airbus Military in mid-2008 but has been grounded while the engine certification and a series of problems with a C-130 engine flying test bed were resolved.
The seven partner nations in the project have a contract clause allowing them to cancel the aircraft order at the end of March. A three-month moratorium is in place as the two sides negotiate possible changes to technical and economic aspects of the fixed price agreement to save the project being derailed or even possibly canceled.
Talking to reporters in Seville, the EPI boss said the company had to virtually develop from scratch the complex software required to control the aircraft's propulsion system.
Durham said EASA is scheduled to do a formal audit on the software system this summer with full engine certification targeted for late 2009.
EPI is a four-nation consortium formed to develop and build the turboprop engine. MTU of Germany, Britain's Rolls-Royce, Safran of France and IPT of Spain are the shareholders.
MTU is the lead nation on the FADEC element of the engine.
Durham said EPI had had to draft in a lot of the best people from across the European partners to resolve the problem, causing other development programs to be "sacrificed." The FADEC workforce had been "more than trebled" to over 200 engineers, he said.
The EPI boss said that at the time of the decision not to proceed with the flight test program, the FADEC system was functional, had the required paper trail for military approval, and had operated for over 2,000 hours on the engine-test bed.
Asked why, in light of the fact the A400M program was already facing delays, the decision had not been taken to develop the traceable software in parallel with the flight test program and grant a waiver for the military-approved system to be used, Durham said he wasn't the right person to say.
"We had to come through with a traceable engine sooner or later and to demonstrate we had it right and give the customer [Airbus] confidence we had it right. Working with the customer we decided this was the best solution," Durham said.
In a statement, Airbus said the lack of certification of the FADEC, as required by EASA, meant they were not in a position to perform first or subsequent flights.
"There is first a civil certification through EASA, and then a "military certification and qualification" which is for the more military specific aspects of the power-plant - airframe combination and utilization such as resistance to gravel and bullets.
EASA grants the stamp for first flight as A400M MSN1 [a test aircraft] will be operated under civil registration. Before granting it, EASA wants to have the assurance that it is safe for the airframe/engine combination to take-off.
In the case of the FADEC software, which is complex integrated software, the minimum assurance is to show compliance to DO178B certification process and as a first step, demonstrate traceability of top level requirements in the software development process," said the statement.
The first aircraft should have been delivered later this year to France, which along with Germany, Spain and the U.K. are the leading members of a seven-nation partnership who signed a fixed price development deal with Airbus to develop the airlifter in 2003.
Along with export contracts with Malaysia and South Africa total orders currently stand at 192 aircraft.
With deliveries slipping at least three years, EADS is seeking to avoid picking up the entire late payments cost, which is threatening to total more than 1.4 billion euros.
As part of their case, company executives have complained recently that the EPI consortium was not their choice but a politically inspired selection to keep jobs and technology in Europe rather than allow the work to go to rival North American bidder Pratt & Whitney.
Durham defended EPI in Seville, saying that the TP400 was chosen not just as a result of European pressure but also because it was a cost-competitive proposal.
Airbus boss Tom Enders said earlier this year the first aircraft could have flown by last October if they had the engine.
Durham said that despite the FADEC setbacks the 2,600 hours of running on test rigs and 25 hours on the flying test bed showed good results.
About 90 percent of development testing is now complete and work is now underway to complete installation of instrumentation on the test engines for MSN1 with the aim of starting ground running tests this summer.
A Hercules C-130 flying test bed operated by British company Marshall Aerospace has been operating with a TP400 replacing one of the four engines since late last year.
The engine has operated at 70 percent of take-off power and will shortly move to takeoff at full power, said Durham.
"Engine performance and weight results pretty much meet our wildest dreams. At take-off and cruise we are meeting maximum temperature margins, fuel consumption is at specification and in-flight restarts are working," he said.
Although A400M is known to be heavily overweight, Durham said the engine weight is within 1 percent of specification.
"That's pretty unusual at this stage of engine development. If the performance we have seen so far is backed up on the flight test program, it is so good it suggests we will be able to take out a bit more weight with modifications in the future."
No comments:
Post a Comment