WO2012172320A1

WO2012172320A1 - Method and system for aircraft inspections

Info

Publication number: WO2012172320A1
Application number: PCT/GB2012/051322
Authority: WO
Inventors: Terry Lewis
Original assignee: Terry Lewis
Priority date: 2011-06-13
Filing date: 2012-06-12
Publication date: 2012-12-20
Also published as: GB201109858D0

Abstract

The invention provides a computer-implemented method and corresponding system for conducting an inspection of an aircraft component, such as an aircraft engine. Reference data relating to the component is stored electronically in a database. An electronic version of an inspection (comprising one or more pre-determined tasks to be performed upon the component by an inspector) is stored in digital form and is communicated to the inspector. During the inspection, data relating to the condition of the component is received and compared to the reference data to generate an assessment of the air-worthiness of the component. The invention is suited to improve maintenance inspections of aircraft.

Description

Method and System for Aircraft Inspections

The present invention relates to the field of aircraft inspections. In particular, it relates to a computer-implemented method and corresponding system for conducting an inspection of at least a part of an aircraft, and capturing, processing, analysing, storing, monitoring and/or reporting damage-related data arising from inspections of aircraft components. The invention is suited for use with horoscope inspections, and/or scheduled inspections for the maintenance of aircraft. In order to ensure airworthiness (and thus public safety), airlines and other commercial operators are required to perform on-going maintenance checks all aircraft after a certain amount of time or usage (i.e. flight time). Such maintenance programs are approved and overseen by airworthiness bodies such as the Federal Aviation Administration (in the US), Transport Canada or the European Aviation Safety Agency. Maintenance operations are carried out by highly trained, licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers and technicians. Their tasks include the inspection of aircraft components, such as engines or engine parts, to check for signs of damage which may compromise the airworthiness of the aircraft.

During such inspections, horoscopes are used to visually inspect mechanical components located in places which would otherwise be inaccessible. The horoscope is an optical device consisting of a tube having an eyepiece at one end, an objective lens on the other, and an optical system linking the two. The optical system usually includes a light source to illuminate the object and facilitate the inspection. An internal image of the illuminated object is formed by the lens and magnified by the eyepiece. The user (technician) then views the magnified object through the eyepiece. A (video) camera is usually fitted to the horoscope to facilitate capture and storage of images. More advanced horoscope devices have video, sound, digital measurement and still capture capabilities integrated into them. The data captured by such devices is viewed via an integrated high resolution monitor. The manufacturer determines which items (tasks) are to be performed for a given inspection of a particular component. However, inspection reports may be bespoke. For example, a particular airline may require that certain additional tasks are carried out during inspections of their engines. In essence, though, an inspection comprises a set of

(diagnostic) tasks which have been determined as being necessary for monitoring and assessing the airworthiness of a given type of aircraft or component.

At the start of his shift, the engineer is given a task card which details the type of inspection he is to perform and which component(s) he must inspect during a particular scheduled inspection. This is a non-computerised process.

During the maintenance inspection, the engineer uses the horoscope to visually examine the condition of the object (e.g. part of an aircraft engine) looking for damage such as cracks, chips, deformations, missing parts etc. Typically, the engineer will start the inspection at the front of the engine and work his way towards the back, inspecting individual components as he proceeds.

As the inspection progresses, the technician fills out a paper-based inspection form. This gives rise to several drawbacks, including · the data which is manually entered into the non-computerised inspection form must somehow be converted into digital form if it is to be subsequently stored, processed or transmitted electronically;

• obsolete and out-of-date inspection forms can give rise to inconsistencies and compromise the integrity of the data collected and the assessment provided;

· the inspection forms may contain tasks and information which are irrelevant in respect of the inspection that the technician is required to conduct. Aircraft are often inspected every night after use. However, as a full inspection takes a considerable length of time, it is not always feasible to conduct a full inspection on a daily basis. Therefore, partial inspections may be carried out each night on different components, areas or aspects of the engine, such that over a period of time the full engine will have been checked and maintained. Therefore, some parts may not need to be checked during a partial inspection. At scheduled intervals, the engine will undergo a full inspection. It should be noted that the terms 'full inspection' and 'partial inspection' are terms known in the art to the skilled addressee. In any event, the maintenance inspection is conducted in conjunction with (i.e. reference to) the manual.

During a full or partial inspection, the engineer visually scans the component for damage. If damage is noticed, its characteristics are measured or observed (e.g. the length of a crack and/or its location, observation of a missing part etc). The engineer then cross-references the damage in the manufacturer's maintenance manual so as to assess its significance in relation to airworthiness. The manual includes reference data concerning the

characteristics of different types, location and dimension of damage and their significance in respect of airworthiness. The manual is specific to the type (i.e. make and model) of aircraft engine.

On occasion, the damage observed by the engineer may not affect the safety or performance of the equipment at all. This is termed as being 'Within the Limit'.

Alternatively, it may fall within an acceptable limit such that airworthiness is not compromised beyond an unacceptable degree. Such damage would attract a 'Continue in Service Limit' assessment. Alternatively still, the damage may fall outside acceptable limits such that airworthiness is deemed to be adversely affected and the engine is assessed as not fit for in-flight operation. In this case the defective component must be replaced or repaired. Such damage would attract an Outside the Limit' assessment.

The engineer prepares a report based upon his findings and this is sent to the aircraft operator for review and, if appropriate, follow-up action. The report contains the damage- related data measured by the engineer, his findings and comments, and any images which have been captured of the components. This is saved as a PDF document, put onto a DVD and physically sent to the aircraft operator. Clearly, this requires preparation time on behalf of the engineer, and there is also a delay in delivery during which time the operator is waiting to receive the data and cannot act upon the feedback as required.

There are several disadvantages to the present system, including the following:

1. typically, the inspection manual is viewed on a terminal which may be located some distance away from where the engineer is conducting the inspection. The manual is usually stored on microfiche or, occasionally, on DVD. Whether in microfiche or DVD form, the manual is large and difficult for the engineer to search through for the particular information he requires for a given inspection task. This searching process is time-consuming. Due to commercial factors, the engineer is under pressure to perform the inspection as swiftly as possible (a full inspection typically taking around 7 hours to complete). This can encourage or even cause human error to occur;

2. the manuals need to be updated over time. It is important that the integrity of the information contained in the manual is preserved. Updating the conventional manual can be a time consuming process and must be performed for each copy of the manual. If the update is not incorporated into the manual, the engineer's manual becomes obsolete and aircraft airworthiness can be compromised as a result;

3. the data gathered from the inspections is not readily accessible to all concerned parties, and therefore it is not often shared with other parties such as the engine manufacturer or other airlines for whom such feedback could be vital. Current inspection techniques do not provide an easy, efficient or speedy way to disseminate the valuable defect-related data gleaned from inspections which could be used to improve the safety of aircraft equipment and prevent accidents. The need for feedback is especially important when an engine is in its infancy and design defects not picked up during testing have yet to come to light. If a profile or historical record of known damage could be built up over time as more inspections are carried out, patterns and trends may emerge which could be used to identify defects or weaknesses before an in-flight disaster occurs. The Civil Aviation Authority has stated that 'communication with the aircraft manufacturer, as well as between airlines, can be crucial. If an operator discovers a problem in maintaining its aircraft that could degrade safety, then that problem should be communicated to the manufacturer and to other operators of the same aircraft type. This is not always easy to do. Industry cost control measures and competitive pressures may not place a premium upon communication among airlines' (Section 1.3, Chapter 3: CAP 718, "Human Factors in Aircraft Maintenance and Inspection "; Civil Aviation Authority, Safety Regulation Group. Available at

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP718.pdf). Although these observations were made by the Civil Aviation Authority in 2002, no solution has been provided to date until the advent of the present invention;

Occasionally, an engineer finds damage of a type or nature not included in the reference manual. In such situations, the engineer should, upon conclusion of his inspection, generate his report and contact the manufacturer to discuss the newly- identified damage and its implications for airworthiness. It is the manufacturer's responsibility to assess the severity of the damage and decide whether the component should be taken out of service. However, the onus is on the engineer to follow up with the manufacturer regarding the un-referenced damage. Should the engineer fail to do this, the consequences can be severe. For example, on 04 November 2010 a passenger aircraft suffered an uncontained engine failure and was forced to make an emergency landing. Prior to the incident, oil wetting damage had been identified by an engineer during a horoscope inspection but the engineer had failed to action this and the engine manufacturer was not made aware of the findings. Had the engineer done so, the incident would likely have been avoided because the manufacturer would have known that oil wetting on an aircraft blade is indicative of a potentially serious problem and the engine should be taken off-wing. Thus, current inspection techniques do nothing to ensure or encourage vital communication between the engineer and the manufacturer.

US 2007/010923 discloses a diagnostic system wherein a technician uses a portable device, such as a graphic tablet, to send data relating to observed damage to a central database so that a team of remotely-located technicians can evaluate and assess the airworthiness of the aircraft. A copy of the repair manual is stored electronically on the database for use in this assessment. However, the inspection process itself is not automated. While the US 2007/010923 system facilitates communication of damage-related data once it has been observed by the technician, it does not offer any assistance to the technician prior to this point in the process. For example, it does not address the problem of identification of required inspection tasks for a given inspection, or selection of reference data relating to inspection-specific tasks. Thus, the technician must still navigate a great deal of non- automated, irrelevant information in order to complete his inspection.

JP 08075706 A discloses a wireless inspection device for detecting flaws in aircraft. Data relating to observed damage or flaws is sent to a CRT monitor and data recorder.

GB 2478030 discloses an arrangement wherein a plurality of sensors is distributed around a control area, such as a runway. The sensors scan the aircraft as it moves through the control area. The scan results are sent to the maintenance control system which checks the scan results against the database to identify anomalies.

US 4816828 A teaches the use of surveillance devices (e.g. cameras) positioned around an aircraft to monitor and record its condition and relay information to air crew during flight so they can assess and observe any damage.

US2002/033946 Al discloses an image capture device for capturing and storing images, sound and error codes relating to an inspected aircraft. The device can receive images from a camera coupled to the device such that while the camera is used to probe the aircraft engine the data is captured for subsequent analysis. Data can be sent to technicians at a remote location for their consideration. However, none of these systems provide a complete, automated solution which enables a technician to perform a maintenance inspection comprising a set of pre-determined inspection tasks, collect the data generated during the inspection and generate an assessment and corresponding report of the airworthiness of the inspected aircraft.

An improved method and associated system have now been devised.

The present invention provides a computer-implemented method and corresponding system for use as an alternative to the present approach to scheduled maintenance inspections of aircraft engines (or other components) and for generating and/or reporting inspection results. Additionally or alternatively, the method/system can be adapted to report any inspection results or conclusions to one or more recipients. An important aspect of the invention is that it provides an automated approach to conducting the inspection in that the tasks which make up the required inspection are presented electronically to the inspector (i.e. engineer/technician) electronically. It provides an improvement over the paper-based inspection forms which are currently completed by the technician. This automation enables only information which is relevant to the tasks at hand to be selected for presentation to the engineer, thus saving time, reducing costs and minimising the possibility of human error.

Thus, in accordance with the present invention there is provided a method and

corresponding system in accordance with the claims as appended herein.

In accordance with a first aspect of the invention there is provided a method of conducting an inspection of an aircraft component, the method comprising the steps:

i) storing reference data relating to the component;

ii) storing the inspection in digital form, the inspection comprising one or more pre-determined tasks to be performed upon the component by an inspector; iii) communicating the inspection to the inspector; iv) receiving condition-related data relating to the component as a result of performance of the one or more inspection tasks;

v) comparing the condition-related data to the reference data to generate an assessment of the air-worthiness of the component.

This, the invention provides a computer-implemented interface for presenting the relevant inspection tasks to the inspector, gathering the requisite data and generating the assessment report. The condition-related data pertains to the status or condition of the component as determined by the inspector during the inspection process. The condition-related data may relate to damage identified in respect of the component (such as a crack, or a missing part).

Preferably, the inspection may be a scheduled inspection. It may be a maintenance inspection to monitor and ensure the airworthiness of an aircraft or component thereof. The inspection may be a full inspection or a partial inspection. It may be a bespoke inspection.

Preferably, the method may further comprise the step of selecting and displaying a sub-set of the reference data wherein the sub-set is determined by the type of inspection to be conducted. Thus, the reference data which is presented to the inspector may be tailored according to the type of inspection being conducted. This provides the advantage that the inspector is not distracted by non-relevant data. This reduces times, saves effort and reduces the likelihood of human error.

The inspector may be a human technician. Additionally or alternatively, an automated data capture device (such as a borescope or very high speed camera) may be used to perform some or all of the inspection tasks. Preferably, the reference data includes at least one safety threshold associated with the component, or a particular portion of the component, or the nature of the condition-related data. Preferably, the aircraft component is an engine. However, the component could be a part or portion of an engine, or some other aircraft component. The method may further comprise the step of specifying the type of inspection to be conducted. For example, specifying whether the type of inspection to be conducted is a full inspection or a partial inspection or a bespoke inspection.

An engineer may specify the type of inspection to be conducted and/or the tasks associated with a particular inspection. Alternatively, the type of inspection may be determined by a process or person other than the engineer. For example, the aircraft operator may determine the inspection tasks which are to be conducted during the inspection. The scheduled inspection tasks may be stored in association with the engineer's log-in or other identifier. Thus, the set of tasks to be performed during an inspection may be tailored according to requirements.

Preferably, the reference data may be displayed on a screen or computer monitor and/or may be communicated audibly. The pre-determined inspection task(s) may be displayed on a screen. The task(s) may be displayed in list form.

The method may further comprise the step of selecting and displaying at least one sub-task (or 'issue') related to one or more of the pre-determined inspection tasks. The task-related issue(s) may be presented as a list, which may be a drop-down list provided on a screen. An example of a task-related issue may be 'missing pieces'. The method may comprise the step of selecting an issue, sub-task or option from the displayed list.

Preferably, the inspection is conducted using a horoscope and/or other mechanical inspection aid such as a camera. The inspection may be a full or a partial inspection. Preferably, the reference data is stored on a machine-readable storage medium such as a disk. The data may be stored on a server which may be located remotely from the inspection site. The method may further include the step of reading the reference data from the storage medium and/or loading it into volatile memory e.g. RAM.

Preferably, the stored reference data includes at least one value or range of values ('safety threshold') associated with the component. For example, the safety threshold may be associated with:

the type of component being inspected; and/or

the portion of the component being evaluated; and/or

the portion of the component where damage has been found; and/or

the type of damage found; and/or

the dimensions of any damage which has been identified. The stored safety threshold may be a numerical value relating to pre-determined safety limits (e.g. 'continue in service', Outside the limit').

Preferably, comparison of the condition-related data is conducted in respect of the stored safety threshold. The comparison of the condition-related data and the stored threshold value may be performed using a computer processor.

The assessment may include an indication of whether a damaged component is safe for operation or not safe for operation. An authentication process (such as log-in procedure) may be used to confirm the identity of the inspector (user/engineer).

The condition-related data may be provided by an engineer via input means displayed on a screen e.g. an on-screen menu, drop-down box or list, radio button or input box. Voice recognition technology may also be used. The number and/or nature of the input boxes, buttons etc. may be determined based upon the type of inspection to be conducted or the set of tasks defined for the inspection. Thus, if a partial inspection is to be conducted the engineer may be presented with input means relevant only to those tasks which are to be performed. This simplifies the inspection process for the engineer, saving time and effort and thus reducing the risk of error. Alternatively, the inspection measurements may be captured or provided using a horoscope. The condition-related data may be provided, at least in part, by the horoscope or some other data-gathering device.

The reference data may be stored in an electronic database. It may be stored on a server, which may be located remotely from where the inspection is being conducted. The reference data may be accessed electronically via a computer network. Communication across the network may be conducted via cables or may be conducted wirelessly.

The assessment may be presented on a screen. The screen may be provided in association with the engineer's local machine.

The assessment may be provided in the form of a document. The document may be provided as a logical file (stored in digital format) and/or a paper document. The document may contain text, numerical data and/or images relating to the engineer's findings.

Preferably, the method further comprises the step of providing the assessment to at least one recipient. The recipient may be the component manufacturer and/or an aircraft operator.

Preferably, the assessed air-worthiness of the inspected component may be indicated using a colour coding scheme. For example, the assessed impact of identified damage may be colour-coded to indicate its severity in respect of the air-worthiness of the aircraft.

Additionally or alternatively, a textual message may be displayed (perhaps by way of a pop-up box on the screen) to indicate the severity of the damage in relation to

airworthiness, and/or direct the engineer to consider or consult some additional guidelines or data regarding the damage which he has identified. The additional guidelines may be provided on a screen.

The assessment may include one of a plurality of possible safety levels or ratings relating to the assessed air-worthiness of the inspected component. For example, severity levels relating to the assessed severity of the identified damage may be provided. The severity level may relate to the impact of any identified damage upon the air-worthiness of the aircraft and/or component. The method may further comprise the step wherein the condition-related data is provided to at least one recipient. The recipient may be the component manufacturer or the aircraft operator/owner. The data (and/or assessment) may be provided across a computer network or telecommunications network. The data may be provided in digital form. The method may further comprise the step wherein the condition-related data is stored for future access; additionally, it may further comprise the steps of:

repeatedly receiving and storing the condition-related data to build a historical record of damage found during a plurality of inspections of a particular type of aircraft component; and

analysing the historical record to identify a pattern, plurality of occurrences or trend occurring within the data.

The condition-related data may be provided by a user/engineer via a web-based interface and/or web browser. The data may be communicated to a remote storage device or processor via the internet or telecommunications network. It may be provided to a plurality of recipients.

Preferably, the method further comprises the step of requiring the inspector to confirm the validity of one or more commands and/or items of condition-related data that the inspector has generated. For example, when an inspector clicks on any stage of the report and/or enters a piece of data, a popup window or other facility may be provided, prompting him to confirm his action. This feature is important because it reduces errors (such as input errors) and preserves the integrity of the data and resulting report.

Preferably, the method further comprises the step of validating the condition-related data upon entry of the data to ensure that the inspector has entered an acceptable (or

'allowable') input. This may involve comparing the inspector's input against previously- stored reference data to ensure that the inspector's data represents a plausible or viable information. For example, if the inspector enters a numeric value representing the length of a crack on a certain component, but the entered value is longer than the actual length of the component, this discrepancy may be computed or identified by comparing the input value against the stored maximum length and flagging this as an issue to the inspector. The inspector may then be required to correct or amend his data entry before being allowed to proceed with the inspection process. Other error-reducing mechanisms may be provided within the scope of the invention to ensure the validity and integrity of the user's input.

Also in accordance with the first aspect of the invention, a computer-implemented system is provided, the system being arranged and configured to perform the method steps described above. The system may comprise a microprocessor. According to a second aspect of the invention, there is provided a computer-implemented method of identifying a damage-related trend associated with a given type of aircraft component, the method comprising the steps of:

i) storing an inspection in digital form, the inspection comprising one or more predetermined tasks to be performed upon an aircraft component by an inspector; ii) communicating the inspection to the inspector;

iii) receiving data relating to damage found by the inspector during an inspection of an aircraft component;

iv) storing the damage-related data to build an historical record of damage found

during a plurality of inspections on a particular type of aircraft component; and v) analysing the historical record to identify a pattern, plurality of occurrences or trend occurring within the data. The method may further comprise the steps of:

processing the damage-related data to generate an assessment of the impact of the damage upon the air-worthiness of the aircraft; and/or

providing an indication and/or alert of any pattern, plurality of occurrences or trend identified within the data to at least one recipient.

The data may be received electronically over a computer or a telecommunications network. The data may be in digital form. The step of analysing the historical record may be performed automatically at

predetermined periodic intervals or upon command, or both. The analysis may be performed by a computer processor executing a software-implemented algorithm.

Also in accordance with the second aspect of the invention, a computer-implemented system is provided, the system being arranged and configured to perform the method steps of the second aspect as described above.

A preferred embodiment of the invention will now be provided by way of example only, and with reference to the accompanying Figures in which:

Figures 1 and 2 show alternative embodiments in accordance with a first aspect of the present invention.

Figures 3, 4 and 5 show screen shots of a system in accordance with a first aspect of the invention.

Figure 6 shows a screen shot of a system in accordance with a second aspect of the invention. In a preferred embodiment, the invention comprises application software which is stored and executed upon a server 3. The server also stores maintenance and safety reference data relating to the relevant engine type (i.e. the manufacturer's manual for the aircraft engine). This includes safety limits for assessing the impact of different types of damage upon airworthiness. In essence, the server 3 stores a centralised, electronic version of the conventional microfiche/DVD version of the manual. The reference data (i.e. manual) is presented to the engineer 1 via a web-based interface which is displayed on the engineer's local machine 2. The engineer's computer 2 is in communication with the server 3. The communication between the local computer 2 and the server is conducted via the internet or other telecommunications network. However, in an alternative embodiment the reference data and/or application software is stored/executed on the engineer's local machine 2.

In use, the engineer 1 logs into the system. The log-in process not only serves to verify the engineer's identity but also provides an audit-trail for the maintenance company 4. If an engineer 1 logs out before the end of an inspection, the next engineer knows where to pick up the inspection as the system maintains a record of which tasks have already been completed and which are yet to be performed.

After logging in, the engineer indicates which type of inspection he wishes to conduct (e.g. full or partial) as indicated on his task card. He does this by selecting options from the interface displayed on the screen 2, as shown by references 5a and 5b of Figure 3. In some embodiments of the invention, however, the engineer may be informed of the inspection type required after logging into the system.

If a full inspection is to be performed 5a, every item (task) 6 in the inspection report is automatically opened and presented on the screen, ready for the engineer to populate with data. If, however, a partial inspection is selected 5b only those tasks 6 relevant to that type of inspection are displayed. Thus, the system focuses the engineer's attention on only those tasks which are required and presentation of superfluous information is avoided. This is a significant benefit of the present invention. The engineer conducts his inspection using a video horoscope of the type known in the art, typically starting from the front of the engine and working backwards. The tasks 6 on the screen 2 are presented to the engineer 1 in the order in which he would typically complete them. As the inspection progresses, measurements and assessments are taken in respect of the relevant components. Thus, data relating to the condition of the component(s) is generated. This condition-related data provides an indication of the status and current characteristics of the components, including any damage which the inspector identifies.

During the inspection, the engineer (or device) visually scans the engine component(s) looking for damage. If damage is found, the details (e.g. location of damage, type of damage, size of area affected, part which is missing etc) are entered into the system. This could be performed in various ways.

In one embodiment of the invention shown in figure 1, data relating to the engineer's findings is manually entered by the engineer into the system via the web-based interface. This can be achieved by means of input boxes, drop-down boxes, radio buttons, menu options etc presented to the engineer on his computer. When the engineer has completed a particular task 6, he may select the 'add issue' button 7, causing a list of issues or options to drop down on the screen as shown by reference 8 in Figure 5. The list is presented in the same order as in the conventional manual. As the list presented to the engineer contains only those issues relevant to the task in hand, the engineer does not need to work through lots of irrelevant information in the manual, thus saving valuable time and effort.

An important aspect of the system is provided via various error-eliminating or reducing mechanisms. For example, when an inspector clicks on any stage of the report a popup appears informing him to confirm his action. This is eliminates or at least reduces errors. Thus, the system is selective in the information that is displayed to the engineer; the information is tailored to the current inspection being conducted.

If the engineer selects a particular issue from the drop-down list, (e.g. 'missing pieces') another box/list may be presented on the screen providing further sub-tasks, detail or options (e.g. 'position'). The engineer enters details of the damage he has found using the boxes provided on the screen. The engineer is able to enter numerical values (e.g. length of a crack) and/or text-based narrative in which he provides comments and observations relevant to his findings. His inputs will then be incorporated into the assessment report which the system will generate. If the engineer enters a value relating to some damage he has found, the system provides an on-screen assessment (e.g. 'continue in service', Outside the limit' etc.).

Conventionally, the engineer would have to formulate this assessment himself by searching for the relevant information in the microfiche/DVD-based manual, then comparing what he has found against the correct reference data. Thus, the invention provides a quicker, more efficient and accurate alternative to the known approach.

In addition, the system determines when the inspector has inputted incorrect or inappropriate data within a drop down menu in the "add issue" section. By way of example, if the inspector finds a dent on the High Pressure Compressor, he would select 'dent' and then 'position' options in the drop down menu list. He enters the

data/measurement captured from the borescope into the value boxes. If he has selected the incorrect position when he enters the measurement the system has a secondary back up that informs him/her that the data entered is not in the area of the position selected. In other words, if the inspector has indicated that the dent is in the lower 25% of the blade and he/she enters a value of "0.850" the system, by way of a secondary popup, will inform him "to be in the lower 25%, the measurement must be less than 0.800". The inspector will then have to select the correct position which in this case would be "Area B". Therefore, the plausibility of the inspector's data is verified upon input into the system. Therefore, the system performs error checking upon entry of the data, which reduces the possibility of errors propagating through into the resulting inspection report, and preserves the integrity of the data.

During the inspection, the engineer is also able to capture images via the horoscope for use as evidence of damage. The images can be saved to the local machine and will be attached to the report when it is generated at the end of the inspection. The images will be uploaded to the server along with other (text-based and/or numerical) data. In an alternative embodiment, a semi-automatic approach may be used wherein, instead of all data being measured, captured and entered manually by the engineer, an integrated horoscope video device is used to capture data. In yet another embodiment, a fully automatic capture of the data is used. A horoscope 3-D scanner or Very High Speed Camera, perhaps assisted by a robotic device or system, is configured to collect and upload data automatically without the engineer's need to take the measurements himself. In this case, the engineer takes on the role of an observer and the scanner (in conjunction with the robotic arrangement) creates a whole engine scan in 3D. This embodiment is illustrated in Figure 2.

Whichever way the data is captured, the system receives, stores and/or processes the data for the tasks performed during the inspection. Processing involves comparing the condition (damage) related data against the reference data stored in the electronic manual on the server. The results of the comparison are displayed on the engineer's screen in a colour coded fashion, providing a visual indication of the severity of the damage which has been found. For example, a green light or green text may be used to indicate that the damage is considered to be 'Within the Limit' - i.e. is deemed not to adversely affect the airworthiness of the component. Orange text or shading can be used to alert the engineer that he needs to refer to the relevant 'Continue in Service Limit' parameters (which are selected and displayed for him by the system). Alternatively, red colour coding may be used to indicate that the damage he has found falls foul of the Outside the Limit' parameters. Thus, the data entered by the engineer or device is analysed in relation to one or more safety-related thresholds which are predetermined within the digitally stored reference manual.

During the inspection, the data is either stored locally (on the engineer's machine) or uploaded to the server, or both. The engineer's managers and/or the client are able to connect to the system and obtain an update while the inspection in actually in progress. The engineer does not need to interrupt his work to update the relevant parties as the information is available via the system as the inspection is underway.

When the inspection is finished, the engineer uses the system to generate an inspection report which includes his findings, related data and/or observations. The condition-related data is uploaded to the server and stored for future access. According to the known approach, the engineer would need to generate the report as a PDF document containing all of his findings (measurements, observations, images) for each task. This would then be sent to the aircraft operator as described above. By contrast, the present invention enables the engineer to generate the report at a click of a button, the report then being set electronically to the operator.

Thus, the invention provides the important data and feedback to the operator instantly and any required response can be taken without delay. Moreover, the inspection results can be sent to other relevant parties, such as the manufacturer, so as to share the findings. This may be performed automatically or upon command. This relieves the engineer or operator of the responsibility of sharing the data, and ensures that the vital communication takes place. It should also be noted that if, during the inspection, the engineer detects damage which is not presently referenced in the manual, the engineer is able to link directly to the manufacturer's support personnel for discussion. In the presently described embodiment, links 9 are provided at the side of the screen which provide the contact details of the manufacture's customer support department. The links are represented as buttons 9 which the engineer can click on, each button directing the engineer to a different manufacturer.

Thus, the engineer is prompted at the time of the inspection to contact the manufacturer to seek a decision regarding the new damage. The discussion between the engineer and manufacturer takes place much sooner than with the present approach, in which the engineer would need to finalise his report, generate the PDF document, send it off to the manufacturer and then make the telephone call to the manufacturer to follow up. The present invention enables the relevant data to be sent to the manufacturer at the click of a button during the inspection, such that the vital discussion can take place straight away before the engineer has a chance to forget the matter. Thus, accidents such as that of 04 November 2010 could be avoided. In accordance with the second aspect of the invention, the stored data is analysed using a software-implemented algorithm to identify trends or patterns occurring in the data as it increases over time i.e. as more inspections are carried out. For example, if cracks are detected in the same location within the same type of engine during more than one inspection, this may indicate a weakness or other design issue which needs to be addressed. The data and/or the results of the pattern analysis are shared with the engine manufacturer and/or other airlines as crucial feedback, thus helping to improve aircraft design and safeguard passenger safety. This is especially important in respect of newly-introduced equipment where design issues not detected during testing have yet to emerge. Figure 6 shows an example of a screen shot in accordance with this aspect of the invention. The example shows two engine reports with cracks noted to the Booster 2. The representation of the crack is shown to propagate over time (cycles). The legend to the right 10 represents all the other categories of damage e.g. missing material, nicks and dents etc..

Advantages of the invention include:

• the inspection (list of required tasks) is presented via an automated process which enables the task list of each inspection to be amended easily and quickly from a central resource;

· the automated inspection interface provides an easy and simple means for entering of condition related data as the inspector performs the displayed tasks, and enables only relevant tasks to be presented;

• error checking mechanisms can be built into the computer-implemented system to preserve the integrity of the data and the resulting assessment report; for example, data can be verified upon entry into the system to ensure that the user has not entered a value which is impossible or implausible in reality; and/or the user can be prompted to confirm any actions taken during the inspection process such that the inspector must double check his actions before committing them to the final report; updates to the reference manual can be made easily and quickly from a central location because the reference data is stored electronically on a server; the updated information can be disseminated to all maintenance staff quickly and easily;

the inspection results can be sent to the aircraft operator much more quickly and easily than with the known approach;

the inspection results can be shared with the manufacturer much more easily and quickly than with the present approach;

during the inspection, the engineer is presented only with task-related information which is relevant to the inspection he is currently conducting; he does not need to search through large quantities of irrelevant tasks and/or reference data to find what he needs; thus the inspection takes less time to complete;

the inspection report can be generated more swiftly and easily;

damage which is not currently in the manual can be reported more swiftly and easily to the manufacturer; the engineer is guided towards the relevant

manufacturer thus at least reducing the possibilility of the engineer failing to follow-up on the matter;

the results of more than one inspection can be saved for analysis such that trends can be identified; this can allow design issues to be noticed and addressed before accidents occur;

an audit trail of completed and/or partially completed inspections is available to the maintenance company so that an individual engineer's inspections can be monitored. This can also provide an efficient means of handing over partially- completed inspections from one engineer to another.

Although the above embodiments refer to horoscope inspections of aircraft engines, the invention is not intended to be limited in this regard and the person skilled n the art will understand that it can be readily used in relation to other aircraft components, as well as other types of devices such as industrial gas turbines, steam turbines, diesel engines, and automotive engines etc.. It should be noted that the above-mentioned embodiments illustrate rather than limit the invention, and that those skilled in the art will be capable of designing many alternative embodiments without departing from the scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims. In the claims, any reference signs placed in parentheses shall not be construed as limiting the claims. The word "comprising" and "comprises", and the like, does not exclude the presence of elements or steps other than those listed in any claim or the specification as a whole. In the present specification, "comprises" means "includes or consists of and "comprising" means "including or consisting of. The singular reference of an element does not exclude the plural reference of such elements and vice-versa. The invention may be implemented by means of hardware comprising several distinct elements, and by means of a suitably programmed computer. In a device claim enumerating several means, several of these means may be embodied by one and the same item of hardware. The mere fact that certain measures are recited in mutually different dependent claims does not indicate that a combination of these measures cannot be used to advantage.

Claims

A computer-implemented method for conducting an inspection of an aircraft component, the method comprising the steps:

i) storing reference data relating to the component;

ii) storing the inspection in digital form, the inspection comprising one or more pre-determined tasks to be performed upon the component by an inspector; iii) communicating the inspection to the inspector;

iv) receiving condition-related data relating to the component as a result of performance of the one or more inspection tasks;

A method according to claim 1 wherein the inspection is:

i) a scheduled inspection;

ii) a maintenance inspection; and/or

iii) a full or partial inspection.

A method according to claim 1 or 2 and further comprising the step of selecting and displaying a sub-set of the reference data wherein the sub-set is determined by the type of inspection to be conducted.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein the inspector is a human technician or an automated data capture device.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein the reference data includes at least one safety threshold associated with the component, or a particular portion of the component, or the nature of the condition-related data.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein: the aircraft component is an engine; and/or

the method further comprises the step of providing the assessment to at least one recipient, preferably wherein the recipient is the component manufacturer and/or an aircraft operator.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein the condition-related data is provided by the inspector via an on-screen menu, drop-down box, radio button or input box.

A method according to any preceding claim and further comprising the step of selecting and/or displaying at least one sub-task or option related to one or more of the pre-determined inspection tasks.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein an authentication process is used to confirm the identity of the inspector prior to performance of the inspection.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein the inspection is conducted at least partially using a boroscope and/or the condition-related data is provided, at least in part, by a boroscope.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein the reference data and/or one or more inspection task is stored in an electronic database and/or is accessed electronically via a computer network.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein the assessment is presented on a screen and/or the assessed air-worthiness of the component is indicated using a colour coding scheme. 13. A method according to any preceding claim wherein the assessment includes one of a plurality of possible safety levels or ratings relating to the assessed air-worthiness of the component.

14. A method according to any preceding claim further comprising the step wherein the condition-related data is provided to at least one recipient.

A method according to any preceding claim further comprising the step wherein the condition -related data is stored for future access.

A method according to claim 15 and further comprising the steps of:

repeatedly receiving and storing the condition-related data to build an historical record of damage found during a plurality of inspections of a particular type of aircraft component; and

analysing the historical record to identify any pattern, plurality of occurrences or trend occurring within the data.

A method according to any preceding claim wherein the condition-related data is provided by a user via a web browser and/or the data is communicated to a remote storage device or processor via the internet or telecommunications network.

A method according to any preceding claim and further comprising the step of requiring the inspector to confirm the validity of one or more commands and/or items of condition-related data that the inspector has generated.

A method according to any preceding claim and further comprising the step of validating the condition-related data upon entry of the data to ensure that the inspector has entered an acceptable input.

A computer-implemented method of identifying a damage-related trend within a given type of aircraft component, the method comprising the steps of:

i) storing an inspection in digital form, the inspection comprising one or more pre-determined tasks to be performed upon an aircraft component by an inspector; ii) communicating the inspection to the inspector;

iv) storing the damage-related data to build a historical record of damage found during a plurality of inspections on a particular type of aircraft component; and

v) analysing the historical record to identify any pattern, plurality of occurrences or trend occurring within the data.

A computer implemented method according to claim 20 and further comprising the steps of:

A computer implemented method according to claim 20 or 21 wherein the step of analysing the historical record is performed automatically at predetermined periodic intervals or upon command, or both.

A computer-implemented system arranged and configured to perform the method of any preceding claim.

A computer implemented system according to claim 23 wherein the system comprises a measurement device for measuring and/or capturing condition or damage-related data.

A computer implemented system according to claim 24 wherein the measurement device captures the data in an electronic or digital form for processing. A computer implemented system according to claim 24 or 25 wherein the measurement device is a borescope.