Avionics, fatigue, vibration, materials and flight, engine, non-destructive…all of these areas require specialist products, software and training. And they are all intertwined into aviation and the manufacturing and maintenance of the aircraft operated in this industry where it is imperative to be ready for anything at any time. We will be exploring the latest technological advances in aerospace testing as well as the tried and true products already here.
On April 29th, 2021, ZeroAvia’s R&D aircraft made an off-airport landing just outside Cranfield airport perimeter during a routine pattern test flight (logged as ZeroAvia Test 86, and the 6th flight in this flight testing segment). The aircraft landed normally on its wheels in a flat grass field and almost came to a stop, but was damaged as it caught the left main gear and wing in the uneven terrain at the end of the field at low speed. Everybody involved is safe, and without injury. The incident was immediately reported to the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), and the Fire Service attended on the ground, as is the standard procedure.
The facts as they stand now are as follows: the flight conformed to the approved test route over the airport; the structural integrity of ZeroAvia systems was maintained throughout the incident sequence and there were no unintended hydrogen or electrical releases and no fire; after the landing, the crew were able to safeguard the battery and safely release hydrogen from the onboard tanks, following ZeroAvia safety protocol; no fluid leaks were observed at the time; and full data logs were preserved and will be used in our investigation.
Following the flight test incident, ZeroAvia appointed a team of experts to conduct the internal investigation. These individuals, led by Dominic Cheater, ZeroAvia’s Head of Airworthiness, are independent from the design and operation of the HyFlyer I program. Dominic holds extensive expertise in airworthiness, flight test engineering and air safety. He has past experience with major industry names such as Babcock International as Chief of the Office of Airworthiness.
Vibrant has received FAA Part 145 repair station certification for its Albuquerque, New Mexico facility. The certification makes it easier for Vibrant to support OEMs, airlines, and independent MROs with its revolutionary process compensated resonance testing (PCRT) services. PCRT provides unparalleled nondestructive testing for worldwide aerospace, automotive, and power generation industries.
“For more than 30 years, Vibrant’s innovative nondestructive testing services have helped industries cost-effectively test every part, ensuring higher quality and reliability while reducing costly incidents caused by undiscovered faults deep inside parts,” said Lem Hunter, president, Vibrant. “FAA Part 145 repair station certification delivers yet another level of integrity to our services, guaranteeing Vibrant meets the FAA’s high standards in quality and accountability.”
As a part of receiving the certification, Vibrant hired Greg Sullivan to serve as the repair station’s accountability manager. A licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic with inspector authorization and a former American Airlines Boeing heavy airliner captain, Sullivan brings real-world experience to Vibrant, including experience in interpreting, meeting, and documenting processes and procedures as per FAA regulations.
Carlisle Interconnect Technologies announced that it is now offering vibration and mechanical shock testing. These services provide original equipment manufacturers (OEM) insight into how a product will behave while in vibration environments found in helicopters, turboprop planes and more. In addition to performance, CarlisleIT’s vibration and shock testing also helps OEMs evaluate conformance to product’s specification requirements, determines resonate frequencies and behavior during sudden deceleration.
“Product testing is a very important part of the manufacturing process, and we have a team of experts who will make sure that every product is 100% ready to go to market,” said Rob Degrave, product line manager, Aerostructures for CarlisleIT. “As a leading supplier of interconnect technologies and services, our goal is to provide as many high-quality services to OEMs as possible to ensure that they continue to achieve their goals and foster innovation that propels the industry forward.”
In spite of a laudable safety record, recent airframe and engine incidents have together raised concern about whether we might be taking the vast improvements in safety over the last two decades for granted. Certainly, the series of high profile engine failures have caught the attention of many. What’s going on and what can be done to address these mishaps?
About the time the CFM 56 engine experienced its uncontained engine failure on Southwest 1380, killing a passenger in the direct line of fire of the rocketing engine parts, the industry was already in the thick of a series of engine failures.
These incidents culminated in twin incidents on February 20. United Flight 328, a 26-year-old 777 powered by Pratt & Whitney 4000 engines experienced an engine failure during taking off from Denver, cascading engine parts across the landscape. The same day, a PW4000 powered 747-400 cargoliner, operated by Longtail Aviation, experienced a mid-air explosion and fire on a PW4000 engine, similarly raining parts over its flight path.
These two incidents and several both before and after Southwest 1380 raise concerns about maintenance and even design and manufacturing and whether our laudable safety record on crashes is in jeopardy.
The Big Picture
We know most things went right during these events. Like those before them, the United crew, who oddly remain unnamed despite the wide-spread coverage, were able to safely land the aircraft. In its March 5 incident update, NTSB reported the spar valve, which stops fuel flow to the engine worked. But examination of the engine accessories showed multiple broken fuel, oil, and hydraulic lines and the gearbox was fractured, all feeding the dramatic fire caught in passenger images.
“It must be pointed out the aircraft landed safely,” The Giles Group’s Carol Giles, shown below, told Aerospace Tech Review. “The good news is the reliability and piloting skills that come into play, mitigates what could have been a huge catastrophe.”
At a time when the industry has delivered unprecedented safety, one is right to ask what might be going on. While crashes have occurred overseas and remain achingly few and far between, we do have numerous airframe and engine incidents that, together, raise concern and begs the question whether we are taking the vast improvements in safety over the last two decades for granted.
Certainly, the series of engine failures have caught the attention of Congress.
“Two senior U.S. lawmakers said the FAA has failed to turn over a report to Congress on airline engine safety required under a 2018 law,” reported Assurance Ltd. “Without the report it was impossible for anyone ‘to know whether the best practices and recommendations to improve airline engine safety could have helped to prevent the engine mishaps that have taken place since the October 2019 safety review.’ Recommendations to improve airline engine safety have been languishing for well over a year. Even more concerning is the potential missed opportunity to address similar airline engine safety issues before they occurred again.”
Adam Pilarski, Avitas senior vice president, shown right, thinks the problem is more systemic than just isolated incidents affecting airframes and engines.
“It’s not just the 737 Max,” he told Aerospace Tech Review. “Every manufacturer has problems. Every single one and I think they tried to do too much too soon because of demand. We tried to go too fast into large production. The manufacturers, unfortunately, didn’t get their stuff together before producing record numbers of engines or aircraft. Their only approach was to ask how they can squeeze out another few cents through minor tweaks not how to produce the vast numbers of engines needed. We saw similar problems with the OEMs both Boeing and Airbus.”
Pilarski noted engine issues are not unique to Pratt having affected CFM, GE and Rolls Royce.
“The problem is,” Pilarski added, “manufacturing is not sexy. Manufacturers only wanted to push out more products rather than focus on the boring stuff.
“This has been happening for years and is not new,” he continued. “They were looking at market demand rather than thinking of how to produce thousands of units. I think they didn’t focus on how you actually put it together – the boring things. They didn’t make the right effort.”
He also questions whether manufacturer emphasis on aftermarket service came at the expense of production capabilities. He has previously noted manufacturers don’t make money on engines but make it up in aftermarket service programs.
“I don’t know if the current issues are systemic from design all the way through to manufacturing,” Giles added. “It’s hard to think that every manufacturer would have a systemic issue. But it’s good to question whether or not we are going too fast.”
Pilarski sees these problems as a test for the new leadership.
“We don’t know how the new leaders at these companies will address these issues,” he said, noting Pratt is now under Raytheon after its merger with UTC. “John Slattery, who I respect and admire as much as I did David Joyce, is now heading up GE. He’s a brilliant marketing guy but his strength is not in the boring development and delivery of engines. But using baseball language, he has a good bench.”
He also sees how Covid could benefit the industry. “To some degree the disaster we have now with Covid gives manufacturers breathing room since no one is pushing for new aircraft immediately,” he pointed out. “Now is a good time to do the boring stuff, figure out what went wrong with design and actually delivering one unit after another in the thousands.”
Giles also agrees Covid is an opportunity to examine what is happening with new engines and the engine/airframe combination.
“We should be asking ourselves these questions,” she concluded, noting United 328 prompted internal company discussions whether it was about bad maintenance or, perhaps, a design issue.
“You don’t know until you do the investigation,” she told Aerospace Tech Review. “I’m not sure what the root cause is of the engine events, but they are major.”
Perhaps the point is that whether the company is run by marketing, bean counters or engineers, it can still go astray as the industry has already seen.
While the 737 Max may be the latest poster child, there have been serious issues with aircraft design and production with every new aircraft and, in the past 20 years, few have been delivered on time owing in part to development and production problems.
Even after delivery some, like the 787, have been grounded because of battery fires. Similarly, Pratt’s Geared TurboFan, powering the A320new, A220 and Embraer E190 has struggled through the engine problems. The question is whether what we are seeing is normal teething or a systemic problem.
Of course, there is Air Force and 787 quality issues and now the electrical system problems on 106 737 MAXs built in 2019 that is now complicating the MAX’s return to service.
Problems with Rolls Royce’s Trent 1000 prompted a redesign of the turbine blades and replacement owing to premature wear, disrupting global 787 operations. In mid 2020, EASA issued an airworthiness directive prompted by another issue, unrelated to the Trent’s previous problems. It called for one-time, ultra-high sensitivity fluorescent penetrant inspection of seal fins and replacement of parts if cracks are identified. It prompted the company to revise its inspection regime on the low-pressure turbine and focused on the disc seal fins. Rubbing wear between discs and interstage static seals could prompt cracks in the front seal fins and lead to disc cracks in the low-pressure turbine discs.
Problems have also occurred on GEnx-powered 787s after an inflight failure in 2016. The GEnx-1B-PIP2 engine suffered substantial damage when ice on the fan blades broke loose, causing the FAA to order engines replaced or repaired because it feared failure of both engines in flight.
The list goes on.
New SMS Requirements
All this is happening against a backdrop of international requirements for manufacturers to implement the Safety Management Systems (SMS) that have been widely adopted throughout the industry and is considered a significant contributor to improving safety.
SMS is a decision-making system based on proactively identifying, assessing and controlling hazards and safety risks before they result in accidents and incidents, and analyzing performance data for continuous improvement, according to the Aerospace Industries Association, involved in developing voluntary SMS standards.
Work within the industry has been ongoing since the first decade of the century culminating in the adoption of ICAO Annex 19 requiring SMS development for design and production approval holders. The FAA embraced this effort, reporting in 2018 on its Manufacturers SMS (MSMS) Pilot Project and the Part 21/SMS Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), as part of an effort to develop a rulemaking package. The Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) was tabled in 2018.
Simultaneously, however, the manufacturing industry developed a standard for voluntary SMS programs known as National Aerospace Standard (NAS 9927) or Safety Management Systems and Practices for Design and Manufacturing. NAS 9927 was approved by the FAA, which encouraged industry to implement the voluntary program.
The publication of the international industry standard developed by the world’s leading aerospace designers, manufacturers and maintenance organizations, promises improved safety performance and enhanced safety culture.
Implementing a Safety Management System for Design, Manufacturing and Maintenance Providers is available free.
The team that spent two years developing the standard and included the AeroSpace and Defense Association of Europe (ASD), Aerospace Industries Association of America (AIA), Aerospace Industries Association of Brazil (AIAB), the Aerospace Industries Association of Canada (AIAC) and the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA). It enables the global aviation industry to implement a SMS consistent with the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Annex 19. The organizations continue their work to ensure future revisions are effective.
“Development of an internationally-recognized SMS Standard that is consistent with Annex 19 means that we now have a tool to implement key safety measures in a consistent manner up and down our industry, which ultimately results in a more accountable safety system,” said David Silver, AIA’s vice president for civil aviation at the time.
“SMS for manufacturing is coming down the pike very fast,” Giles indicated. “MROs have implemented SMS because regulators around the world are requiring it.”
Finding Root Causes
But SMS is a pro-active solution while other programs dig to find the root cause of problems and, according to Pilarksi, that may be what is needed.
In the late 1990s, the FAA developed a safety system requiring airlines to identify problems and follow them back to the root cause which could be as simple as the wrong tools or inadequate training. This system then requires corrections ensure the issue does not arise again. It is like a safety investigation designed to prevent the crash, not determine what went wrong and why after the fact.
There seem to be four trends colliding. The first, as Pilarski noted, the rush to meet demand. Second, are industry efforts to reduce maintenance costs by increasing time between overhauls and inspections.
Pilarski has noted in the past that it is harder to predict component lifecycles and repair costs with new designs and materials.
The question is whether the intervals between those maintenance events are really what they should be.
The infamous issues with the Rolls Royce Trent engine powering the 787 prompted the company to reduce the time between servicing as did the two United and one JAL incidents.
After a previous engine failure caused by a fractured fan blade on a United Honolulu-bound flight in 2018, United’s inspections for the 777 were set at 6500 cycles but United 328 had flown only 3000 cycles. Pratt then reduced it to 1000 cycles before the FAA mandated immediate inspections which grounded the aircraft.
After the Honolulu incident the National Transportation Safety Board cited insufficient training for Thermal Acoustic Image (TAI) inspections developed by Pratt & Whitney. It said maintenance technicians misdiagnosed a problem with the blade. In response Pratt created a more formal inspection training curriculum after which the FAA issued an AD requiring stepped up inspections.
Assurance Ltd. Director Andy Evans explained TAI causes movement between each side contacting any inclusion in the metal, creating heat by friction which is then detected by a thermal sensor.
Evans said TAI is rare in the MRO industry which relies more heavily on conventional ultrasonics which, like sonar develops an acoustic reflection for internal defect detection.
“It’s a current MRO issue,” Evans told Aerospace Tech Review. “The concern from the 2018 NTSB investigation is there were shockingly big flaws in the PW process in the early days.
Hopefully, inspections have been much more tightly controlled in recent years, but the JAL event suggests the FAA airworthiness directive compliance times may have been too generous.”
Evans found it surprising that the NTSB investigation on the 2018 incident yielded no recommendations. “It again — like Sioux City did a generation earlier — highlights the critical nature of NDI in engine overhaul shops, the importance of properly specifying the technique, ensuring competent inspectors, considering the human factors and ensuring the process is quality assured.”
Last July, Assurance published an analysis of NDI process failures in United’s Honolulu incident shortly after NTSB published is report identifying a low-cycle fatigue fracture. The engine had been overhauled by Pratt’s Overhaul and Repair facility in 2015. Blades received a fluorescent penetrant inspection as well as TAI, developed by Pratt in 2005 to inspect interior surfaces of the hollow core fan blade, according to the NTSB.
Interestingly, the 2015 and earlier 2010 TAI inspections revealed a thermal indication in the same location as the low-cycle fracture. This was attributed to flaking paint which affected about 25% of blades, said the board.
The report further noted that Pratt identified TAI as a new and emerging technology meaning it didn’t have to develop a formal initial and recurrent training program, certify TAI inspectors or have Level 3 inspector on staff in conformance with normal NDI practice. Despite the time between development of TAI and the 2018 engine failure, the inspection process was still categorized as new and emerging despite being used on over 9000 blades.
While the manufacturer had developed formal training on TAI the two inspectors working on the engine were not permitted to attend in favor of clearing out a backlog of blades in the shop.
“So,” said the Assurance report, “clearing the backlog appears to have been more important than formal training on the inspection. It also noted the backlog resulted in overtime begging questions about personnel fatigue. One inspector complained the procedures were ‘written for the lab rather than the shops and had lots of gaps.’”
The board also noted environmental problems in the inspection room that was bathed in sunlight that could throw off the TAI scanners. The Assurance report also questioned the frequency of FAA visits to the inspection facility.
After post-incident inspection revealed the thermal indications at the location of the fatigue crack, Pratt initiated an “over-inspection of all digital images of the TAI’s accomplished on the PW4000 112-inch fan blades according to the NTSB findings. That prompted the AD requiring an initial and recurring TAI inspections of the hollow core blades.
Another issue focuses on nacelles that are supposed to contain engine failures but clearly do not and may have fallen victim to the tweaks Pilarski spoke about.
Manufacturers and FAA have been struggling with this issue for years. They are trying to develop more robust designs beyond protecting against fan blade break up and expanding to protect against disintegration of disks such as happened to an Engine Alliance powered Airbus 380 over Greenland in 2017.
Boeing is also working on solutions for when fan blades fly forward, according to FAA, which said the work relates to the 737 and will result in mandating a design change.
Evan expects a modification to make the nose cowling attachment more robust to emerge as an AD. He also noted the aircraft in service are dwindling with the retirement announcement of JAL’s 777 fleet recently. Even so, United expects to return its 777s to the fleet “in the near future,” according to statements on its earnings call.
The numerous engine incidents also begs questions about the generosity of ETOPs operations. However, it is early days yet to suggest changes will come especially with 40 years of ETOPS operational experience in the industry.
Given the issues running through both engines and airframes, it may well be time to pause and take stock to ensure advancements made in the last two decades in materials and design are not somehow becoming counterproductive to safety.
MTI Instruments announced their newest product addition, the PBS-4100+ Portable Vibration and Balancing System, “PBS Gen 4.”
“We are excited to announce our new PBS Gen 4 as it is fully portable, lightweight and rugged, and more importantly, it is the most powerful system in its class on the market,” said MTI Instruments’ president, Moshe Binyamin. “Additionally, this compact form factor system is designed to be used on the go with extended frequency range. We also expanded the capability set to include numerous innovative capabilities.”
The PBS Gen 4 is designed for commercial aviation mobile applications, featuring a new high-visibility case and up to four hours of continuous use on a single battery charge.
Included in the new system is a third tachometer input, supporting three-spool engines and geared-reduction fans giving the technician more information than ever before. The frequency range has been extended to 25 kHz, to support turboshaft and APU testing which streamlines vibration survey and balancing processes. With engine backup and restoration capabilities, users can be sure engine parameters are configured correctly every time. While the unit reflects the latest in balancing system technology, it remains easy to use with limited training required, especially for technicians familiar with previous iterations of MTI’s PBS systems.
The PBS Gen 4 integrates features that ensure the system is easier to use than any PBS before it.
“The new cable check is a fantastic addition which, once it hits the market, I believe will quickly become the new standard in the future,” said Hamish Haridas, field service representative, Vital Link Europe Ltd. “The quick switch is also a great addition which will alleviate having to remind the operators that conducting vibration survey is in another ‘screen’, making balancing seamless.”
The new software has enhanced protection against online threats, with continuing updates provided, ensuring seamless workflow and limited downtime due to cybersecurity issues.
“The true differentiator is all of the technology and software packed into a simple easy to use interface,” said Ken Ameika, global director of Sales at MTI Instruments. “Today and tomorrow, when engine vibration levels need to be negated, the WinPBS balancing wizard will get the job done quickly and easily. It even supports both trial weight and stored influence coefficient balancing methods. There is no other system on the market that can do what the PBS-4100+ does as efficiently and easily.”
With vibration diagnostics that can help identify vibration sources and onboard spectral analysis finding potential problems before they occur, the system helps identify concerns before they become safety risks in-flight situations. With unique tachometer signal conditioning circuitry, speed signals from all engine types, as well as tachometer generators, add a higher level of diagnostics, available only to users of the PBS-4100+ system.
Automated software testing company Parasoft, announced the Embedded Software Testing & Compliance Summit. During this free virtual event hosted by Parasoft, industry leaders will share their embedded software quality stories of overcoming safety-critical compliance and security challenges with automated software testing solutions.
The event will be held on May 6, 2021 at 8 a.m. PT. This is LIVE virtual summit to learn about technologies and techniques to ensure compliance of modern embedded software.
“Companies across all industries need to have confidence in their software quality and deliver safe and secure software to their users,” said Arthur Hicken, evangelist and event moderator, Parasoft. “Many embedded software companies are turning to automated and integrated testing that includes static code analysis, unit testing, regression testing, code coverage, and requirements traceability to ensure compliance with functional safety, security, and coding standards. In this summit you’ll hear how organizations are solving real safety and security software issues.”
“With Parasoft C/C++test, I was able to implement a highly successful unit testing infrastructure and productive workflow with best practices for our organization’s software verification strategy,” said Bill Schiller, senior principal software architect and event speaker, Smiths Medical. “We selected Parasoft because of its intuitive IDE, strong market presence and great technical support team.”
Featuring a keynote from guest speaker, Bruce Douglass, a technology evangelist and high-tech embedded consultant, the 2.5 hour agenda also includes presentations from SAAB Avionics Systems, Smiths Medical, IAR, and Renovo. All these companies share a common goal to continuously deliver safe, secure, and high-quality embedded software.
The industry leaders speaking at Parasoft’s live virtual summit will cover a range of testing topics including unit testing, code compliance, data and data management essentials, and modern development workflows. Here’s a preview of what they’ll share:
• A medical device technology company successfully adopted a unit testing solution and gained value right from the start. • An avionic developer and manufacturer achieved code compliance and streamlined productivity. • An automotive data platform provider delivered the first safe, secure, and scalable platform for fully autonomous vehicles. • A software tool chain development company for embedded systems accelerated the CI/CD pipeline with build tools for Linux for Arm.
Fairview Microwave has just debuted a new series of miniature SMT packaged noise sources that are ideal for built-in test equipment, dithering for increased dynamic range of A/D converters and as a source for bit error rate testing. Applications include microwave radio, communication systems, military and commercial radar, base station infrastructure, test and measurement, and telecom data links.
Fairview Microwave’s new line of noise sources includes nine models with dual in-line pin (DIP) and industry standard SMT gullwing pin surface mount packaging options. They cover frequency ranges from 0.2 MHz to 3 GHz and provide a source of additive white gaussian noise (AWGN) with a crest factor of 5:1. The DIP models boast a noise output power level of -5dBm. The SMT gullwing pin models in this line feature high output ENR levels ranging from 31 dB to 51 dB. These rugged 50 Ohm designs can operate over a wide temperature range of -55°C to +125°C and require DC voltage levels of +12 Vdc or +15 Vdc.
“With this addition of miniature SMT packaged noise sources, we can fully address designers’ needs for circuit board level proof-of-concept or prototype applications. Plus, we’re able to bypass the normal 8-10 week lead times and, instead, ship these products the same day with no minimum order quantity,” said Tim Galla, senior product line manager.
“Every crisis presents an opportunity. Although the aviation sector – one of 8tree’s core markets – was adversely impacted by the COVID-19, our intention was to emerge stronger coming out of the crisis. The ISO9001 certification sends a clear message to our customers and stakeholders saying ‘8tree is still here – stronger than ever,’” says Erik Klaas, 8tree’s CTO.
8tree performs R&D, product design and manufacturing in Constance, Germany. ISO9001 certification for this site took effect on March 19th 2021.
“Alongside the adoption of 8tree’s products by major OEMs, airlines and MROs like Airbus, Delta, SIAEC and Lufthansa Technik, the independent ISO9001 certification marks another significant milestone for us. The certification emphasizes that 8tree’s products are developed and manufactured under highest quality standards,” says Arun Chhabra, 8tree’s CEO.
Ampex Data Systems (Ampex), a Delta Information Systems Company, has been awarded a firm-fixed price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract in support of the Air Force Test Center. The contract will provide telemetric electrical system-supplies and ancillary services to Edwards Air Force Base (AFB), Eglin AFB, and other Department of Defense (DoD) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) activities.
In addition to Ampex’s engineering and maintenance support, deliveries include high-speed flight test and mission data recorders. These units are SWaP-C optimized, software-defined, and provide a secure, network-capable platform for critical flight test instrumentation and mission operations.
Ampex supports United States Air Force and DoD mission avionics and flight testing as a supplier for programs including the F-15, F-16, F-18, F-35, B-2, MQ- 1, MQ-8, MQ-9, MQ-25, RQ-4, P-3, and P-8 among many others. Most notably, Ampex provides the network file servers and boot computers that are the digital backbone of the United States Navy’s E-2 C/D Hawkeye fleet.
“The future in this technology space is high-speed, network-based systems that can analyze recorded data and then secure it with advanced encryption,” said Jim Orahood, vice president and general manager of Ampex Data Systems. “Ampex can meet these future requirements now. We look forward to supporting the DoD and NASA through this new contract vehicle for the next decade.”
It’s very encouraging that the end of the pandemic is hopefully in sight and once these wonderful vaccines are successfully rolled out then life can start to return to some normality. At which point travel and events such as ATW can safely recommence.
We therefore feel it is more prudent to reschedule ATW, one last time, to 3-4th November ’21 giving the vaccine roll out more time. The event will remain at the same Diagora venue in Toulouse, France.
We are very confident that our in-person event will be a great success and it’s even bigger than when it was originally scheduled pre-pandemic! The conference programmes are already in place https://lnkd.in/dmS7FSz and the exhibitions halls are nearly full https://lnkd.in/dTRjzTW.
The hiatus in our event schedule has ironically given us more time to use our new publication, ✈ Aerospace Tech REVIEW to share news and raise even greater awareness of the event for us all. Therefore we expect a significant take up from attendees which will create a much needed business platform for us all.
Thank you to all our loyal supporters and see you in Toulouse!