1090

IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTEDAREASINCOMMUNICATIONS,

VOL. SAC-4, NO. 6, OCTOBER 1986

Avionics Maintenance 2010

Abstraet-This paper postulatesan avionics maintenance concept for A typical avionics failure is currently corrected as folthe year 2010. The concept recognizes the change that is occurring in lows: A plane returns to its base and the pilot reports to new systems toward internal fault isolation using built-in test. Curhis ground crew a problem such as a faulty inertial navirently, fault isolation data are held in the failed system or within the aircraft computer for subsequent analysis by maintenance personnel. gation system (INS). The ground crew subsequently power up the Under the Maintenance 2010 concept, fault data would analyzed as brings a maintenance cart up to the plane to be soon as possible during a mission to identify replacement components electronics and check out the problem. If an LRU of the needed. A data link from the aircraft to a ground maintenance support INS is found to be faulty through BIT or. manual troubsystem is proposed permit further diagnosis faults andto expedite to of leshooting, it is replaced with a spare LRU, and the faulty preparation for immediate corrective maintenance actionon the flight line when the aircraft returns. The concept is designed to eliminate LRU is returned to the AIS for repair. If a spare LRU is aircraft down time while awaiting maintenance and thereby improve not available, the LRU is still sent to the AIS for repair, operational readiness. but the aircraft is down until the repair is completed. At

the AIS, the INS LRU will be put on a tester for fault isolation. It will be repaired, if possible, by removal and replacement of a SRU. The SRU will then be returned to the depot for repair. Downtime for this aircraft is that interval of time beginning with the aircraftlanding and ending when the LRU is replaced and checked out. It can include AIS repair time and the time to obtain a replacement LRU from.the depot,if repair cannot be made at the AIS. One AIS supports operations of one aircraft wing. Each aircraft wing is self-sufficient with respect to maintenance capability, so its AIS includes all the ATE. necessary to isolate faults in LRUs and SRUs and all the spares required to perform corrective maintenance. A,complete AIS for an aircraft wing equipped with modem aircraft, such astheF-16, requires about 4500 ft2 of air-conditioned space. Deployment of an aircraft wing with its .AIS to a forward base can present a major logisticsproblem. Since there is also a trend toward increasing the organic maintenance capability of the aircraft wing,more sophisticated test equipment will be required at the AIS, adding to its size and compounding its problem of mobility. Maintenance of mechanical components on an aircraft are handled in much the same way as avionics. The Air 11. BACKGROUND Force has, however, experimented with and implemented aircraft on-condition monitoring of engines. Current Air Forcedoctrinecallsforthreelevels of on some maintenance for avionics. These are organizational (Org), The C-5A aircraftwasthe subject of the first effort in onanalywhere a line-replaceable unit (LRU) is removed and re- condition monitoring. The C-5A malfunction, placed in an aircraft on the flight line; avionics interme- sis, detection, and recording system (MADAR) not only diate shop (AIS), where a shop-replaceable unit (SRU), monitors engine performance but also monitors 1000 test such as a printed circuit card, is removed and replaced in points, including avionics, engine vibration, pressure, temperature, and airframe stress. (Refer to [l] for more aLRU;anddepot,whereSRUs and someLRUsare repaired to the piece part level. (Refer Fig. 1 for aflight detail on the C-5A aircraft instrumentation.) Initially, the to line view of aircraft maintenance.) monitored data were transmitted to ground stationsfor processing. Difficulties with workload during missions Manuscript received December 9, 1985; revised May 12, 1986. and the quality of the data forced a modification of the The authors are with ARINC ResearchCorporation,Annapolis, MD system to replace the direct data transmission with a re21401. corder and off-line processing with a human quality conIEEE Log Number 8609796. 1. INTRODUCTION ILITARY aircraft must be kept operationally ready. The approach to maintaining an aircraft has significantinfluence on its downtime, and extended periods of downtime affect operational readiness even more than poor reliability. The increased use of digital avionics with extensive built-in test (BIT) has not provided the hopedfor analgesic for extended downtimes, but does suggest changes to traditional maintenance approaches that may provide relief, if not now, then perhaps for new aircraft in the 2 1st century. The U.S. Department of Defense has spent considerable money and effort on command, control, and communications (C3) systemsfortacticaland strategic operations. This paper attempts to show, using the Air Force as an example, that a tactical air-ground data link could be used totransmit maintenance datafromaircraft to ground stations and, in doing so, decrease aircraft downtime and increase the quality of maintenance. An example of an evolving commercial aviation maintenance system that uses an air-to-ground data link is presented to show that it is feasible.

0733-8716/86/1000-1090$01.00 O 1986 IEEE

DOWLING AND RUPINSKI: AVIONICS MAINTENANCE 2010

Organizational Level Intermediate Level Depot L.evel

1091

1-r

rrr rr

Report Failure Remove/ReplaceTest Equipment Set Up Isolate Obtain Spare Checkout

components Transport SHU

Or Fault Not Found

/
Transport LHU

Remove/l2eplare Components

SRUS and LRUS

Components (Piece Parts)

Fig. 1 . Flight line view of aircraft maintenance.

trol interface. Over the years this system has been used, and an extensive databaseof recorded performance information established. A more recent effort in on-condition monitoring involves the turbine engine monitoring system (TEMS) for the A-10/TF-34 engine. Thisprogram consists of in-flight and ground hardware to sense and analyze engine parametric data for fault detection,isolation, and trending. Currently, the Air Force is completing a squadron integration program that will integrate the TEMS capabilities into the maintenance and logistics capabilities for the A-lO/TF-34 engine. TEMS is complemented by the Comprehensive Engine Management System (CEMS), a ground-based system that supportstheengine management community with trend analysis of performance data, engine status, and inventory control. Although TEMS will have an interface with CEMS, there apparently is no serious consideration being given to telemetering TEMS data to CEMS ground stations via a data link. (Additional information on the TEMS concept is available in [2] and r31) The B-1 aircraft also has a planned in-flight engine performance monitoring system as part of the central integrated test system (CITS).Theengine monitoring provided by CITS is not as sophisticated as that of TEMS (primarily time and temperature data) but CITS does include maintenance monitoring of avionics subsystems. Failed subsystems are identified with BIT and the information displayed for air crews. Data from CITS are recorded for lateranalysis by ground maintenance facilities. Several observations can be made from the preceding information. Avionics maintenance concepts need to undergo changes to keeppace with advances in technology for newer systems. On-condition monitoring of nonavionics systems is

gaining acceptance as a replacement for scheduled overhauls. A more efficient approach is needed to minimize system downtime due to maintenance. 1 1 MAINTENANCE CONCEPTS 1. 2010 The overall conceptof Maintenance 2010 aspostulated by the authors is shown in Fig. 2. The concept involves compiling avionics fault data and formatting maintenance messages by use of an on-board computer. The messages would be transmitted over a data link to the C3 ground communications system that forwards the message to a ground maintenance system.Maintenance personnel within the system would monitor the data and could request additional information by uplinking command messages to the on-board computer. The maintenance system would include the AIS, specialized avionics and engine repair centers, and the depot. Although the time advantage in transmitting fault information over a data link may not seem important for a short mission, the additional lead time provided maintenance personnel for diagnosing,faults can result in a significant saving of time. In an environment in which rapid turnaround of aircraft to maintain a high sortie rate is important, theuse of a data link to provide the maintenance facility with fault data while the aircraft is still in the air becomes very significant. Specific advantages of this concept over current maintenance practices include: Avionics faults would be identified to an LRU and to the extent possible, to an SRU, during a mission. Maintenance personnel on the ground would identify parts required and take action to have the appropriate LRU or SRU available at the flight line when the aircraft returns from its mission. Faulty LRUs and SRUs would be replaced immediately upon return from mission, with the

1092

IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTEDAREAS

IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. SAC-4, NO. 6, OCTOBER 1986

lncermealace

Shop

I
Intermediate

Specialized Avionics Repalr Center

Specialized
Engine Repair Center

Maintenance system cdntrol

Fig. 2. Maintenance 2010: The concept.

aircraft returned to complete operational status in min- the data link. Messages from ground maintenance faciliutes. ties requesting additional data would be processed by the Thosefaultswhichcould not be unambiguously mission computer, which then would issueappropriate identified to an LRUor SRU could be further diagnosed, commands to the FDA. while the aircraft is in the air, by personnel at ground B. 2010 Ground System maintenancefacilities.Additionalinformationconcerning the failure would be requested from the aircraft misThe Maintenance 2010 concept implies a tactical digital sion computer. The response would be used to make a, data distribution system that interconnectsof the mainall diagnosis. tenance facilities in the ground maintenance system and Intermittent faults would be diagnosed in actual op- provides the air-to-ground link to aircraft. There are no erating conditions, rather than being subjected to extencurrent systems that provide this capability, but there are sive bench testing to reproduce the fault. In effect, the programs under development that would provide such a of aircraft becomes a test chamber and the number of CNDs capability for tacticalcommand and control. The intent (cannot duplicate) is reduced. the Maintenance 2010 concept would be to use those sysA ground maintenance system, as shown in Fig. 2, temsratherthantoestablishindependentsystemsfor would reduce some of the requirements for specialized maintenance. The use of a digital modem over a standard personnel and equipment at intermediate-level facilities tactical UHF voice radio such as the ARC-164 is an alby using resources of specialized centers for on-line fault ternative that could use present equipment if augmented isolation. This would reduce the size and complexity of with a ground digital distribution system. the AIS organization,providebettermobility and deThe ground maintenance system, interconnectedwith a creased operating cost, and further support the creation digital communication system as shown in Fig. 2, is esof a two-level Air Force maintenance concept increasing sentialtotheconcept.Downlinkedavionicsfaultdata by the effectiveness of operational maintenance. would be analyzed within the system to identify SRUs needing replacement. Highly trained technicians atthe reA. 2010 Avionics pair centers could query an aircrafts FDA for additional Fig. 3 depicts a typical avionics configuration for a diagnostic information to resolve ambiguities and isolate bus digital aircraft and illustrates the concept of integrating faults to the SRU level. maintenance monitoring and avionics fault detection. The By using this approach, diagnosing. failures should be fault-detectionanalyzer(FDA) has beenintroducedto more effective than the classical approach trying to reof analyze, organize, and store BIT data in each LRU that produce the maintenance problem in a shop environment. is connected to the bus. The FDA would format avionics Once the faculty SRU is identified, the ground maintenance or fault and engine monitoring data to maintenance messages system locates the replacement LRU SRU in the for transmission over a data link. The mission computer supply system. Immediate action is taken to have the rewould control all traffic on the bus, including the transplacement dispatched to the flight line so that the faulty mission of maintenance messages to ground stations over LRU or SRU can be replaced and the avionics restored to

DOWLING AND RUPINSKI: AVIONICS MAINTENANCE 2010

,

1093

..
~

Avionics Bus

Channel A
I

I I
Air Data Computer

Inertial Navigation system

I
1 .
;-.

I I
On-Condi tion Maintenance Monitor
UHF/VHF

I I
I
communications systems Controller Mission Computer

communications

I
1

Flight Control

I Detection Link
L -

1 Analyzer I

Radar Data Processors

T-
1
I
-

Display Generator

I
I

stores Management

I I
I

I
I

Head Up Display

1.
Avionics BUS Altimeter

Channel B Decoder

Situation Display

Fuselage Decoder

Tacan

Wing Decoder

Direction Finder

Decoder

1
Intercom

Fig. 3. Typical avionics bus configuration.

They also experimenting with transmitting full operational capability. The current alternative to this tions. are approach is to wait until the aircraft has returned to base avionics fault information to ground stations to speed maintenance, reduce downtime, and increase operational and is turned over to maintenance personnel. In addition to transmitting avionics fault messages over availability, The following sections describethese efforts. a tactical datalink, engine-monitoring messages could similarly be transmitted by use of the same equipment. A. On-Condition Maintenance Monitoring for The main difference in the engine data would be the ac- Commercial Aircrafi The airlines use one of two techniques for performing tions required by theground maintenance system. Enenginepreventivemaintenance.The first is to perform gine-monitoring data do not necessarily indicate an existpreventive maintenance at scheduled intervals. The secing fault condition, and urgency of maintenance action may not be the issue. Rather, the issue is scheduling pre- ond is to replace engine components at specified perforventive maintenance in an efficient manner to optimize mance thresholds. Many of the airline companies adopted maintenance resources and minimize the unavailability of the second approach as the more cost-effective. This approach reduces maintenance cost and loss of revenue bethe aircraft. cause of aircraft unavailability. The performance threshIV. COMMERCIAL AVIATION MAINTENANCE old approach requires a system to monitor performance DEVELOPMENTS thresholds such as temperature, pressure, and fuel conMaintenance of aircraft used by commercial airlines is sumption during normal engine operation. This on-conregulated by the Federal Aviation Administration. These dition monitoring capability evolved from the Aircraft Inregulations are concerned mainly with flight safety and tegrated Data System (AIDS) developed primarily for allow the airlines a fairly wide latitude in implementing flight safety purposes in the early 1970s. Monitored data techniques used forcorrectiveand preventive mainte- were analyzed to identify components requiring maintewas conducted off line, nance. The airlines primary concern beyond flight safety nance. However,theanalysis is cost effectiveness. Aircraft do not generate revenue sit- which introduced significant delays between recording of ting on the ground. The airlines haveimplemented engine the data and the preventive maintenance action to replace on-condition maintenance with a data link to ground sta- components.

1094

IEEE JOURNAL

ON SELECTEDAREAS

IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. SAC-4, NO. 6 , OCTOBER 1986

Optlonal

/ i

Networks

r- *-7

I I
I

ACARS Processor system

I 1
ESS

I-=
Printer
/ l

VHF

Transceiver
J

Voice Intercom

- Access - J -Air Carrier Management Subsystem

0001

Data Base

Fig. 4. Major elements of the ACARS network.

Event Sensors

Fig. 5. ACARS airborne subsystem.

In 1979, some of the airlines pioneered in transmitting the on-condition monitoring data to ground facilities for immediate analysis to identify components that should be scheduled for replacement. This approach is being used today by TWA, Delta, andUnited Airlines for scheduling maintenance on the DC-9, the Super80, .and the 757/767 aircraft.TheARINCCommunications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is used for transmission of the data (see Fig. 4). ACARS is an air-to-ground communications network that enables aircraft to function as mobile terminals associated with modem airline C2 and management systems. The present ACARS system is fully compatible with ATA/IATA protocols. ACARS automaticallycollectsaircraftdeparture and arrival times. Flight delay information, fuel status, crew pay numbers, and other operationaland maintenance data are entered by the flight crew or collected automatically, depending on the aircraft. The information is transmitted from the aircraft via a data link to ACARS ground radio stations. The information is relayed via the ground stations to a centralcomputerprocessorwherethedataare converted into airline interoperable messages through the ARINC Electronic Switching System (ESS). A diagram of the airborne subsystem is shown in Fig. 5. As shown in this figure, the management unit (MU) receives ground-to-air digital messages fromthe radio transceiver (standard VHF voice radio) with which it is connected andcontrolsthetransmission of air-ground digital messages through the same device. The airborne element of ACARS operates in conjunction with a groundbased digital data processor in either a demand or polled mode. In the demand mode of system operation, the MU will transmit messages when it determines the that ACARS r f channel is free of other traffic. In the polled mode of systemoperation,it will transmit only in response toa message (poll) from the ground containing the coded address of the selected aircraft. The MU gathers data for transmission to the ground from the control unit

(CU) and event sensors on the aircraft. Maintenance messages can also be sent, through the optional auxiliary terminal shown in Fig. 5. Currently,all ACARS dataare transmitted overthe ARINC VHF remote network. This network provides coverage the over continental United States, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Bermuda. Typically, engine-monitoring data are transmitted at five-minute intervals during a climb and 30-min intervals during cruise.A single VHF channel (131.55 MHz) is used by ACARS for transmission of digital information. Maintenance-monitoring data represent only 15 percent overall of the current digital traffic load; however, in some areas the maintenance load is as high as 50 percent. Once received at the ground station, these data are analyzed to determine the subsystems requiring replacement. The aircraft flight schedule is then analyzed to determine the appropriate location to accomplish maintenance with a minimum disruption of operations.

B. Avionics Integrated Maintenance System (AIMS) The airlinecommunity is now considering an expansion of its aircraft engine maintenance concept. Aeronautical Radio, Inc., has proposed a concept for using ACARS to transmit avionics fault information derived from BIT data. The concept, illustrated in Fig. 6, is to format BITE results into an ACARS message and transmit the message to ground maintenance control whenever a system fails. Ground maintenance analyzes the data, using an expert system that emulates the diagnostic logic of the maintenance engineers in the diagnosis of faults. Should additional data be required, query messages are sent to the aircraft until a diagnosis is made. Once the fault is diagnosed, flight operations is queried for a flight plan, and a schedule to perform the required maintenance is established. The appropriate maintenanceactivity (line station) is .notified of scheduled maintenance, stores (supply) is notified of the required component, and the avionics test shop is notified of the fault condition of the LRU being

DOWLING AND RUPINSKI: AVIONICS MAINTENANCE 2010

1095

Link to
Or

Manufacturer

Administrative Data

Line Station

Flight Operations

Shop

Fig. 6. Airlines concept

for avionics integrated maintenance system (AIMS).

replaced. Finally, a database file that records the maintenance activity is updated. Parts of the AIMS concept are currently being implemented. ARINC Specification 604 has been developed by the Airline Electronic Engineering Committee to provide integrated BIT that will interface with ACARS. The standard for the shop ATE to be used in AIMS is also under development (ARINC Specification 608).
V. PROBLEMS The problems in implementing Maintenance 2010 are as much organizational as technical. Currently,adatalink capability fromaircraftto ground sites is not universally available. Aircraft operating in tactical data systems nets now have this capability, and allaircrafthave voice nets for air-to-ground communications. The additionof a modem to provide a digital capability over existing UHF voice channels is an alternative that would make this concept feasible for all military aircraft. Whether an existing data link or a UHF voice channel isused, tactical equipment is being employed for maintenance purposes even though this is not currently an accepted practice. .The effective implementation of avionics fault monitoring depends on an effective integrated BIT. Although new aircraft will be employing BIT, the capability would not be available on existing operational aircraft. Consequently, the implementation of maintenance monitoring via data link would initially be limited to new aircraft. For this reason the concept is targeted for the year 2010. The ground maintenance system needed to support this proposed maintenance concept must integrate operations, maintenance, and supply into a common system. Currently,theseare considered separate functions with supporting communications systems unique to the requirements of each.

changes are needed in the traditional approach to maintenance. A maintenance concept is proposed that would employ data links for the remote monitoring of maintenance data. Advance notice of faults in avionics equipment and degraded performance of engines could be used to accomplish maintenance actions more efficiently. The detection and isolation of faults in the operational environment should minimize shop test time, thus improving operational readiness. Much of the communication equipment needed to implement the concept exists today or is under development. Unfortunately, this equipment was not originally intended for use by maintenance personnel but for tactical missions. What is needed is a revamping of the thinking on the use oftactical and strategic mission equipment throughout the entire mission to include maintenance. Then we can be ready for maintenance in the 2 1st century. REFERENCES
[I] Instruments, C-5A Aircraft, U.S. AirForceTech.Order 1C-5A-2-G, Feb. 13, 1984, Kelly Air Force Base, TX. [2] Evaluation of benefits of the A-l0/TF34 turbine-engine monitoring systemsquadronintegrationprogram, AIAA-84-1414, presented at the 20th Joint Propulsion Conf. AIAAISAEIASME, Cincinnati, OH, June11-13, 1984. [3] A-lO/TF34 turbine enginemonitoringsystem-Evaluationandimplementation, AIAA-81-1447, presented at the 17th Joint Propulsion Conf., AIAA/SAE/ASME, Colorado Springs, CO, July 27-29, 1981.

VI. SUMMARY The trend toward digital avionics in new aircraft, emphasizing extensiveuse of built-in test,suggests that

1096

JOURNAL IEEE

SELECTED AREAS ON

IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL.

SAC-4, NO. 6, OCTOBER 1986

Timothy L. Rupinski ("68-SM'83) received theB.S.degreeinelectricalengineeringfrom Union College, Schenectady, NY, and the M.S. degree in engineering from Northeastern University, Boston, MA. He has more than 18 years of experience in the development of airborneandgroundcommand, control; and communications systems and is presentlyManager of theCommand,Control,and Communications Program ARINC at Research Corporation,Annapolis,MD. He is responsible

for the efforts of over 100 engineers and computer scientists providing lifecycleengineering to programs such as AFLC Gateway, MILSTAR, Mk XV, COMPASS CALL, SC&D, GUARDRAIL, SINCGARS, and TMLS. He previously led system engineering studies on HAVE QUICK, Adaptive HF,andNCTRprojects. He has served as secretaryoftheAirForce Avionics Standardization Planning Group and several Navy avionics interface control working groups. Before joining ARINC Research in 1976, he was a systems engineer with several equipment manufacturers where he worked on systems suchas AEGIS, COBRA DANE, PATRI0T;and TTC39. Mr. Rupinskiis a member of Eta Kappa and the Armed Forces ComNu munications and Electronics Association.