曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
Tank Inspection
September 1998
737-300/
-400/-500
737-28-1118 FUEL – Storage – Main and Surge Fuel
Tank Inspection
April 1999
747 747-28-2205 FUEL – Fuel Tanks – Center Wing Fuel
Tank Inspection
June 1997
747 747-28-2213 FUEL – Fuel Tanks – Main Wing Fuel
Tank Inspection
January 1999
757 757-28-0050 FUEL – Storage – Center Wing Fuel
Tank Inspection
June 1998
757 757-28-0051 FUEL – Storage – Main and Surge Fuel
Tank Inspection
January 1999
767 767-28-0051 FUEL – Fuel Tanks – Fuel System
Inspection – Auxiliary Tanks
July 1998
767 767-28-0054 FUEL – Fuel Tanks – Fuel System
Inspection – Main Tanks
October 1998
Figure 5-2: Puget Sound Airplane Service Bulletins
Boeing Long Beach developed inspection documents similar to service bulletins for the DC-9,
MD-80 / -90, DC-10, and MD-11. These documents were used by Boeing engineers from the fuel
system, electrical, avionics, and product support disciplines. The inspection documents were also
made available to the airlines if they chose to perform their own inspections.
Airplane
model
Document
number
Inspection document
title
Release date
DC-9 MDC 98K9016 DC-9 Fuel Tank Inspection Report March 3, 1998
DC-10 MDC 98K1056 DC-10 Fuel Tank Inspection Report October 30, 1998
MD-80/-90 MDC 98K9027 MD-80/-90 Fuel Tank Inspection Report May 12, 1998
MD-11 Addendum to
MDC 98K1056
DC-10 Fuel Tank Inspection Report Addendum released
August 16, 1999
Figure 5-3: Long Beach Airplane Inspection Documents
5.0 Boeing Working Group Report (continued)
Page 44 Industry AFFSP Report August 4, 2000
The service bulletins and inspection documents developed for the inspection of Boeing airplanes
addressed
! Bonding measurements.
! Examination of all bonding jumper installations.
! Condition checks for all mechanical and electrical components.
! Examination of all fuel quantity indication system (FQIS) wiring and components.
! Examination for fuel leaks.
! Examination of access doors, panels, and openings.
! Examination of general tank condition and sealant.
! Inspection for foreign object debris.
One of the many issues facing the program was that of sample size. As the inspection program
evolved, the Boeing Working Groups recognized that similarities in findings would support a
sampling approach for the total inspection program. The 747 center wing tank, which at that time
already had hundreds of inspections, had shown little variation in findings after approximately 50
inspections. Because the fuel systems of all of the Puget Sound models were designed to the same
basic set of standards and manufactured with the same processes, it was assumed that the findings
from the fleet inspections should be similar across all models. Similarly, all Long Beach models
were designed to a consistent set of standards and manufactured with the same processes, so the
same assumption was applied. The findings have supported this early assumption.
A goal was set for the number of center wing tank inspections for each of the 737, 757, and 767
models. The information from these inspections would identify unique issues for these models and
allow an assessment of any differences in general trends between these models and the 747.
Further, it was determined that a smaller sample size for wing tank inspections was adequate to
validate that there were no differences in aging patterns or design specifics between main and
center wing tanks. For the smaller main wing tank sample size, Boeing engineers assisted on site
in the inspections to ensure there was a detailed understanding of the findings in the smaller
sample. It was also recognized that the center tank of the 727, which is actually a main tank
because of the three-tank, three-engine configuration of this airplane, does not operate differently
(never emptied) than the wing tanks of the 727. It was concluded that a small sample of the 727
center tanks, together with the 727 wing tank inspections, was sufficient to understand design and
aging of the 727.
The sample size for the Long Beach airplane programs was also based on similarities in design
and manufacture. Even though some differences existed for the DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, and
MD-80 / -90 when compared to the Puget Sound airplane models, the differences were considered
to be insignificant, and a smaller sample size was accepted.
Figure 5.4 provides an overview of the Boeing in-service world fleet.
5.0 Boeing Working Group Report (continued)
August 4, 2000 Industry AFFSP Report Page 45
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
航空资料3(79)
