Commercial Aerospace, Aerospace, AvREF,ILS, Parts Logistics,aircraft parts, aerospace parts,AIA, plane parts

Previous posts

All Posts

Previous posts



Add to Technorati Favorites
767 main Fuel boost pump p/n 5006003D
5/8/2008 10:32:43 AM
Is there anyone who knows where we can locate some 767 main fuel tank boost pumps p/n 5006003D?  The current AD for these units has driven the price of SVC and OH material over the cost of new units from Hamilton Sundstrand.  It’s amazing how expensive these pumps have gotten over the last year or so as more and more airlines become compliant with the AD to avoid the vigorous inspection cycle necessary if they’re using the “C” configuration on their aircraft.
Amazing .................
1/5/2008 4:41:45 AM
Passenger jets get anti-missile devices
Updated 18h 51m ago | Comments405 | Recommend56E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints & Permissions | Subscribe to stories like this
Three American Airlines passenger jets will be fitted with anti-missile systems this spring to test how the devices affect fuel consumption and how much maintenance they require.
By Robert Hanashiro, USA TODAY
Three American Airlines passenger jets will be fitted with anti-missile systems this spring to test how the devices affect fuel consumption and how much maintenance they require.
WASHINGTON — Tens of thousands of airline passengers will soon be flying on jets outfitted with anti-missile systems as part of a new government test aimed at thwarting terrorists armed with shoulder-fired projectiles.

Three American Airlines Boeing 767-200s that fly daily round-trip routes between New York and California will receive the anti-missile laser jammers this spring, according to the Department of Homeland Security, which is spending $29 million on the tests.

Jets will fly with the jammer device mounted on the belly of the plane, between the wheels. The device works with sensors, also mounted on the plane, that detect a heat-seeking missile and shoot a laser at it to send the missile veering harmlessly off course.

Anti-missile systems have been tested on cargo planes. But "this is the first time these systems have been tested on actual passenger airlines in commercial service," says Burt Keirstead, director of commercial aircraft protection at BAE Systems, which developed the anti-missile device. "It's the ultimate consumer use of the equipment."

Officials emphasize that no missiles will be test-fired at the planes, which will fly between New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport and the international airports in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

The purpose of the tests is to determine how well the laser-jamming technology works on routine flights, how the devices affect fuel consumption and how much maintenance they require, according to Keirstead.

Although there has not been an attempt to take down a jet on U.S. soil with a shoulder-fired missile, Homeland Security has warned about the possibility because the portable, lightweight weapons can be bought on the black market for as little as a few hundred dollars.

There have been numerous deadly attacks on military jets and cargo planes overseas, and several near collisions with passenger planes.

In 2002, two shoulder-fired missiles narrowly missed an Israeli airliner jet as it took off with 261 passengers in Mombassa, Kenya.

The Defense Department uses laser-jamming technology on its planes, but using the systems on commercial airliners is much more controversial because of concerns about cost and maintenance.

"If this is going to break down every other month vs. every fifth year, obviously that's a big, big difference," says Jim Tuttle of the Homeland Security Department's Science and Technology division.

Keirstead says the systems could be installed for somewhere from $500,000 to $1 million per plane, but it's unclear how much it would cost to maintain them. Airlines have balked at paying the cost, and Congress would have to decide whether the federal government would foot the bill.

American Airlines spokesman John Hotard says company officials agreed to participate in the tests in case Congress eventually requires airlines to install the devices.

But American is "philosophically opposed" to anti-missile technology on commercial planes, he says. "When you look at the cost benefit, it would be an extremely expensive proposition, and in the end, is it really going to work?"

Remote control of commercial aircraft
12/25/2007 6:55:55 PM

This is an extremely thought provoking article I found while searching the iternet.  I thought you would find this interesting.

Jim 

Boeing Fitting Aircraft With Illegal Parts?
 

Chip that was illegally installed in 2000 could have been utilized to execute 9/11 attacks

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet
Wednesday, March 7, 2007

Are Boeing fitting their aircraft with illegal devices that could enable terrorists to remotely hijack airliners and crash them into high profile targets? In light of what happened on 9/11, Boeing's blanket denial that this practice has taken place is both highly suspicious and a threat to national security.

We talked to airline industry representatives to ask them if such technology had been installed in commercial airliners and they denied all knowledge, despite the fact that Boeing were hit with a record fine of $15 million after the company broke the law by selling commercial planes equipped with the QRS-11 gyrochip, which is also used in the guidance system of the Maverick missile.

According to the Associated Press, from 2000 to 2003 Boeing shipped 94 airliners oversees, mainly to China, that contained the chip, a device used for "military applications," stated the report.

According to the Seattle Times, "The QRS-11 chip, made by a unit of BEI Technologies in Concord, Calif., is just over 1-½ inches in diameter and weighs about 2 ounces. It sells for between $1,000 and $2,000. Described as "a gyro on a chip," it is used to help control the flight of missiles and aircraft."

"There could be dozens, even hundreds more components like the QRS11 gyros that have slipped under the eyes of State Department enforcers, said Joel Johnson, the vice president international of the Aerospace Industries Association," reports the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), and "Aircraft incorporating the QRS11 chips are already routinely making flights."

Should it concern us that Boeing began installation of a chip that turns a plane into a remotely guided missile immediately before 9/11?

One month before 9/11, German newspaper Der Spiegel reported that U.S. military-industrial complex giant Raytheon landed a 727 jet six times by remote control using GPS technology at a Hollomon AFB in New Mexico.

In April 2001, aviation history was made when a Global Hawk, which is equivalent in wingspan to a Boeing 737, flew by remote control out of Edwards Air Force Base, across the Pacific Ocean, and landed safely at the Royal Australian Air Force base at Edinburgh, in South Australia state.

Other sources from within the airline industry have told us that such devices were common in aircraft years before 9/11, a remarkable supposition that has led many to suspect that the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were executed using this remote access system.

Recent newspaper reports discussing these devices and the policy to have them in all airliners within three years assure us that they would prevent another 9/11 style outrage - but because any such system is vulnerable to hacking allied with the fact that pilots have no way of overriding the autopilot, not even with secure access codes, this only increases the chances of another 9/11 style attack.

A comprehensive investigation on behalf of those who have the authority and resources to perform it needs to be mandated immediately into whether devices that completely remove control of a plane from the pilot and that have illegally been installed in many existing aircraft are a fundamental danger to national security.

 

 

Look at these whales fly ...
12/14/2007 8:59:51 PM

You have to watch these whales fly.... These are huge aircraft...

 This is the DREAM LIFTER  -  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dnOxMqnfAM&feature=related 

 This is the Beluga - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FDNcp__dE0&feature=related

 This is interesting because of the engine shots - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ58clgqo9o&feature=related

 Engine test lab - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AvzoXPEXxk&feature=related

Next Generation Personal Jet
12/14/2007 8:34:19 PM

This is an awesome little aircraft and the innovation needed to get companies like Day Jet off the ground....   

This article was from Portfolio  

Little Jets, Big Problems

A new generation of tiny, cheap jets could bring commuter air travel to the masses–if the planes can ever get off the ground. Vern Raburn, the controversial C.E.O. of Eclipse Aviation, wants to lead the way, if he can overcome a three-year production delay and financing shortfalls.

 

The Eclipse

In the spring of 1997, Vern Raburn, a technology executive and recreational pilot, took Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen to a dusty landing strip in the Mojave Desert. Raburn had been an early Microsoft employee, and he was now working for ­Allen, helping the billionaire invest his fortune. The pair had flown in on Allen’s Boeing 757 from Seattle to meet storied aircraft designer Burt Rutan. He was working on concepts that had commercial potential, and Raburn wanted his boss to have a look. Seated in a conference room overlooking the runway, Rutan presented his designs to the two visitors, including his latest idea: a civilian rocket he believed would herald the age of space tourism. Rutan would need an angel investor, and Allen, an amateur space geek himself, liked what he saw.

After the presentation, Rutan brought the two men to a nearby hangar, where he was assembling another prototype, something called the V-Jet II—a four-seat jet created by Williams International that was smaller than a Ford Explorer and capable of flying faster than 300 miles per hour. The V-Jet was powered by a pair of new engines—the tiny motors weighed just 85 pounds each, yet they could produce more than 700 pounds of thrust. Rutan told his visitors that swarms of these affordable mini-jets could be used for personal travel and as air taxis, shuttling fliers to little-used municipal airports.

Raburn was hooked instantly. “I got really excited,” he recently recalled. “I tried to sell Paul on the idea.” But Allen balked. The personal computer, yes; a personal jet, what’s the point? Allen, who owned two Boeings and a Gulfstream, thought private planes were a luxury for billionaires, not the masses. After all, Warren Buffett called his jet the Indefensible.

Allen invested $20 million in Rutan’s rocket several years later, but spent not a penny on the mini-jet. A few months after meeting with Rutan, Raburn decided that if no one else would finance and build the V-Jet, he’d do it himself.

It’s June 2007. Raburn and I bounce 16,000 feet above the broad mesas of the New Mexican desert in the successor to the V-Jet, which he has christened the Eclipse 500. He fiddles with the autopilot as blasts of summer air shake the cabin. The auto­pilot refuses to engage, which forces Raburn to take control. “This sucker is so easy to fly,” he says, guiding the Eclipse into a wide arc. Below, the modest Albuquerque skyline slides past.

Albuquerque gave birth to the personal-computer revolution—Bill Gates launched Microsoft from a hotel room here in 1975. A few years later, Raburn went to work for Gates as Microsoft’s 18th employee, but he left in 1982 and sold his options before the stock’s meteoric rise. Today his 5 percent stake would be worth billions, but that doesn’t bother Raburn. “Money never motivated me,” he says. “I’ve made more money than most people ever dream about making. I’ve also lost more money than most people dream about losing.”