NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002 Personal Protective …by using personal protective equip-ment (PPE), including protective clothing, face shields, safety glasses or goggles, earplugs or other

NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

F L I G H T S A F E T Y F O U N D A T I O N

Aviation Mechanics Bulletin

Personal ProtectiveEquipment Prevents

Workplace Injury

F L I G H T S A F E T Y F O U N D A T I O N

Aviation Mechanics BulletinDedicated to the aviation mechanic whose knowledge,craftsmanship and integrity form the core of air safety.

Robert A. Feeler, editorial coordinator

Personal Protective Equipment Prevents Workplace Injury .........................1

Maintenance Alerts ..................................................................................... 12

News & Tips ............................................................................................... 17

November–December 2002 Vol. 50 No. 6

We Encourage Reprints

Articles in this publication, in the interest of aviation safety, may be reprinted, in whole or in part,but may not be offered for sale, used commercially or distributed electronically on the Internet oron any other electronic media without the express written permission of Flight Safety Foundation’sdirector of publications. All uses must credit Flight Safety Foundation, Aviation Mechanics Bulletin,the specific article(s) and the author(s). Please send two copies of the reprinted material to thedirector of publications. These restrictions apply to all Flight Safety Foundation publications. Reprintsmust be ordered from the Foundation.

What’s Your Input?

In keeping with FSF’s independent and nonpartisan mission to disseminate objective safetyinformation, Foundation publications solicit credible contributions that foster thought-provokingdiscussion of aviation safety issues. If you have an article proposal, a completed manuscript or atechnical paper that may be appropriate for Aviation Mechanics Bulletin, please contact the directorof publications. Reasonable care will be taken in handling a manuscript, but Flight Safety Foundationassumes no responsibility for material submitted. The publications staff reserves the right to edit allpublished submissions. The Foundation buys all rights to manuscripts and payment is made toauthors upon publication. Contact the Publications Department for more information.

Aviation Mechanics BulletinCopyright © 2002 Flight Safety Foundation Inc. All Rights Reserved. ISSN 0005-2140

Suggestions and opinions expressed in FSF publications belong to the author(s) and are notnecessarily endorsed by Flight Safety Foundation. This information is not intended to supersedeoperators’/manufacturers’ policies, practices or requirements, or to supersede governmentregulations.

Staff: Roger Rozelle, director of publications; Mark Lacagnina, senior editor; Wayne Rosenkrans,senior editor; Linda Werfelman, senior editor; Rick Darby, associate editor; Karen K. Ehrlich, web andprint production coordinator; Ann L. Mullikin, production designer; Susan D. Reed, productionspecialist; and Patricia Setze, librarian, Jerry Lederer Aviation Safety Library.

Subscriptions: One year subscription for six issues includes postage and handling: US$240.Include old and new addresses when requesting address change. • Attention: Ahlam Wahdan,membership services coordinator, Flight Safety Foundation, Suite 300, 601 Madison Street,Alexandria, VA 22314 U.S. • Telephone: +1 (703) 739-6700 • Fax: +1 (703) 739-6708

Cover photograph: © Copyright 2002 PhotoDisc Inc.

Personal ProtectiveEquipment PreventsWorkplace Injuries

For maximum effectiveness, protective equipment must beappropriate for the environment in which it will be used,

must fit the wearer correctly, must function well andmust cause minimum discomfort.

FSF Editorial Staff

Aviation maintenance personnel of-ten are exposed to machinery, nox-ious chemicals and other hazardsthat can result in a variety of inju-ries. Many of those injuries could beprevented by using appropriateequipment and adhering to safetyrequirements.

A 1995 report by Israeli researcherson a five-year study of work-relatedaccidents among aviation groundworkers — including maintenancepersonnel — at an Israeli airline, said

that 523 such accidents occurred from1988 through 1992. Of the 523 acci-dents, 40 percent involved slips, tripsand falls; 20 percent involved liftingand carrying; 19 percent involvedmachinery; 13 percent involved trans-portation accidents (including motor-vehicle accidents that occurred whiletraveling between home and work);and 8 percent involved physical inju-ries and impairments resulting fromelectrical burns, thermal burns, for-eign substances in the eyes and ex-posures to chemicals and machinery.1

2 FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION • AVIATION MECHANICS BULLETIN • NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002

The report said that the work-relatedaccidents occurred because of sys-tems failures (mechanical systems,electrical systems and electronic sys-tems) and human failures; most ac-cidents were a result of humanfailures.

Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) saysthat losses from ramp damage — in-cluding damage incurred duringmaintenance — cost air carriers andcorporate operators an estimatedUS$5 billion a year. FSF ExecutiveVice President Robert H. Vandel saidthat some U.S. operators have calcu-lated that, for every dollar they spendbecause of ramp damage, they spend$2 for related injuries to maintenancepersonnel and ramp personnel.2

Nevertheless, Vandel said, “Currentdata sources do not contain sufficientinformation to develop a precise es-timate of the extent of the problem.”

An FSF initiative to help preventramp damage, hangar damage andrelated injuries is designed to collectmore accurate and more detailed dataon damage and injuries, includingmaintenance-related damage andinjuries.

Specialists in preventing occupationalinjuries say that methods of reducingaccidents include educating workersabout workplace hazards and effec-tively enforcing company safety rulesand government safety regulations.

Government occupational health au-thorities, which in many countriesregulate working conditions, typical-ly say that employers first shouldevaluate their operations to identifypotential hazards and determine howbest to control them. Whenever pos-sible, employers should attempt tocontrol hazards at the source. Whenthat is not possible, however, a main-tenance technician’s exposure tohazards sometimes can be limitedby using personal protective equip-ment (PPE), including protectiveclothing, face shields, safety glassesor goggles, earplugs or other hearingprotection, and respirators. In addi-tion, employees should comply withother rules on safe workplaceclothing.

“Controlling a hazard at its sourceshould be the first choice because thismethod will eliminate it from theworkplace altogether or isolate itfrom the worker,” said the CanadianCentre for Occupational Health andSafety (CCOHS), which has devel-oped guidelines for establishing aneffective PPE program.3

Among the strategies that should beconsidered first in an effort to elim-inate hazards are those that includechanges in engineering controls(physical changes to a machine or toa work environment), in work prac-tices (methods that maintenancetechnicians are trained to use in per-forming their assigned tasks) and in

FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION • AVIATION MECHANICS BULLETIN • NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002 3

administrative controls (technicians’schedules or task assignments).4,5

If those efforts are not sufficient andPPE is required, the U.S. NationalSafety Council (NSC) said in its Avi-ation Ground Operation Safety Hand-book that several general principlesshould be considered.

“The equipment should be appropri-ate for the environment in which itis being used,” the NSC said. “Forexample, it would not be appropri-ate to provide acid handlers with thesame kind of leather and asbestosapron worn by a welder. Nor wouldone furnish a welder with a rubberand plastic outfit suitable for acidhandlers.

“Personal protective equipment andclothing should fit the user, do its jobwell and cause minimum discomfort.All three factors should be consideredif the equipment is to provide maxi-mum effectiveness.”

The employer is responsible for de-termining whether workplace hazardsexist that require employees to usePPE, for selecting the type of PPEthat will be used and for ensuring thatemployees know how to use the PPEand how much protection it willprovide.

The employees, however, are respon-sible for correctly using the equip-ment that is provided.

Nicholas Onufer, a registered nursewho teaches maintenance-safetyclasses for MedAire, a provider ofmedical services and related medicalequipment to the aviation industryand other industries, said that mostmaintenance personnel in his classesrecognize the value of PPE and relat-ed safety requirements.6

“Most people in the aviation industryunderstand that safety is a very impor-tant part of the job and are very attunedto safety requirements,” Onufer said.“The maintenance-safety class is de-signed to keep maintenance personnelaware of what they’re doing.”

The two-day class teaches safety con-cerns in the hangar; management ofmedical emergencies in the workplace;and government occupational safetyrequirements, including the use ofPPE. The class discussion of PPEemphasizes hearing protection, respi-ratory protection and eye protection,with some discussion of the circum-stances in which protective steel-toedfootwear or hard hats or other protec-tive headgear might be warranted.

William O. McCabe, director, Du-Pont Aviation, said that the attitudesof company management are just asimportant as an understanding of therules about use of PPE and other safe-ty equipment.7

“You get the level of safety that youdemonstrate that you want,” he said.


“It’s a lot more than just guidelines;it involves establishing a strong op-erating discipline.”

The six maintenance personnel in his30-member aviation department take“the normal precautions to protecttheir hearing and to wear gloves andsafety glasses in hazardous areas,” hesaid. “But we’ve gone beyond that.”

For example, he said, “When work-ing around aircraft, we mandate theuse of bump hats [which protectagainst minor bumps and abrasion].This also applies to the flight crewsperforming aircraft inspections, evenwhen away from home base on trips.”

McCabe said that when he becamehead of DuPont’s aviation departmentin 1997, he arranged for a review ofdepartment safety practices by Du-Pont Safety Resources,8 a DuPontbusiness that provides consulting andtraining in workplace safety. He saidthat the review — and resulting safe-ty recommendations — contributedto the department’s record of nearly2,000 days without an on-the-job re-cordable injury. (A recordable injuryis an injury that must be treated bymore than minimal, on-site first aid.)

“Airlines, particularly those in coun-tries without stringent governmentoccupational safety regulations, re-ally need assistance,” McCabe said.“They will achieve their own posi-tive safety culture only by seeking

[outside] assistance to tackle the ba-sic details.”

A number of government authoritiesand other organizations have guide-lines for establishing workplacesafety programs — including rulesfor the use of PPE and other safetyrequirements.

For example, CCOHS says that, indeveloping any program involving theuse of PPE, three elements must beconsidered:9

• Protection of workers;

• Compliance with applicablelaws, regulations and internalcompany standards; and,

• Technical feasibility.

PPE is known as a “point-of-contact”control that manages a hazard that hascome in contact with a worker, rath-er than a “pre-contact” control thatprevents such contact.

“PPE is used to reduce or minimizethe exposure or contact [with] injuri-ous physical, chemical or biologicalagents,” CCOHS said. “A hazard can-not be eliminated by PPE, but the riskof injury can be eliminated or greatlyreduced.”

CCOHS said that PPE should be usedonly in the following circumstances:

• When pre-contact controls areinadequate or unavailable;


• As interim protection until pre-contact controls are implemented;

• When pre-contact controlswould be ineffective or imprac-tical, such as during mainte-nance, clean up and repair; and,

• During emergencies.

Where appropriate, workers’ equip-ment should be fitted individuallyand, most importantly, all workersmust be shown how to use andmaintain PPE by conducting regu-lar inspections to identify damageor malfunctions before the PPE isused.

CCOHS and other authorities say thata PPE program will succeed only ifworkers understand the need to usePPE and support the PPE program.The program should be reviewed atleast once a year, along with reviewsof production records and safetyrecords, to determine that protectiongoals are being met.

Most PPE programs cite severalcategories of PPE, including protec-tion for the eyes, which may be ex-posed to hazards such as chemicals,dust, projectiles, gas, vapor andradiation.

In the United States, the Occupation-al Safety and Health Administration(OSHA) estimates that 1,000 eye in-juries occur in the workplace everyday. About 60 percent of those injured

have been found to be wearing no eyeprotection when the accident oc-curred; of the 40 percent who woreeye protection, many wore “thewrong kind of eye protection for thejob,” OSHA said.10

OSHA says that protective eyewearmust be appropriate for the type ofhazard being encountered and mustbe fitted properly so that hazardoussubstances cannot go around or un-der the protective equipment and intothe eyes. Protective eyewear alsomust allow air to circulate betweenthe eye and the lens of the protec-tive equipment. Goggles typicallyprovide better protection than faceshields, but the best protection isprovided when goggles and faceshields are worn together. Prescrip-tion safety eyeglasses and prescrip-tion goggles are available forworkers who require corrective lens-es. Standard safety goggles may beworn over eyeglasses if the goggleshave cups large enough to accommo-date the eyeglasses.11

Safety specialists disagree aboutwhether contact lenses should beworn by maintenance personnel whowork with chemicals. Some say thatcontact lenses can trap dust or chem-icals in the eyes, causing irritation,and that chemical splash may be moreinjurious if contact lenses are in theeyes. Others believe that contact lens-es may prevent some dusts and chem-icals from reaching the eyes.12


Nevertheless, CCOHS says that someconditions may require that contactlenses not be worn, including situa-tions involving exposure to chemicalfumes, vapors, dust and other parti-cles in the air; potential for splashingchemicals; intense heat or dryness;exposure to infrared rays; and han-dling of caustic substances.

James W. Allen, M.D., M.P.H., anoccupational health physician, saidthat if a maintenance technician un-dergoes laser surgery for visioncorrection, he or she should wearsafety glasses for two months tothree months after surgery to preventeye injury. Allen said that extra eyeprotection is required while thetechnician adjusts to changes in view-ing patterns that may affect depthperception.13

PPE programs also include protectionagainst hearing loss that may resultfrom exposure to loud noise. Govern-ment authorities in many countrieshave formulas for calculating workerexposure to noise and require hearingprotection in the workplace for work-ers exposed to noise of more thanabout 85 decibels (dB) for long peri-ods of time. (A decibel is equal ap-proximately to the smallest degree ofdifference of loudness ordinarily de-tectable by the human ear. The scalebegins with zero dB for the faintestaudible sound. Other sounds on thescale include normal conversation atabout 60 dB, a ringing telephone at

80 dB and a jet engine during takeoffat 140 dB. Without hearing protection,people exposed to noise of more thanabout 85 decibels for long periodsof time may experience permanenthearing loss.)14

Hearing protection may include ear-plugs, earmuffs or helmets. Earplugs,which typically are manufacturedfrom foam plastic, waxed cotton, sil-icone or fiberglass fiber, are insertedinto the ear canal to block sound.They can be disposable or reusable.Earmuffs are two hard-shelled cup-like devices containing sound-atten-uating material and cushioned by softmaterial; a headband connects the twocups. Helmets can be manufacturedto support earmuffs and to cover thehead to reduce bone-conductedsound.15

Another element of PPE is protectionfor the head, which may be at risk be-cause of falling objects, bumping andentanglement of the hair in machin-ery. If maintenance personnel work inareas that present risks for injury, theyshould be required to wear hard hatsor — for those working near exposedelectrical conductors — protective hel-mets that are designed to reduce therisk of electrical shock. The NSC saidthat bump hats, which originally wereintended for wear by maintenance per-sonnel working inside a fuselage,should not be considered adequatesubstitutes for conditions requiringhard hats.


Breathing protection may be requiredbecause of risks from dust, vapor, gasand oxygen-deficient atmospheres.There are three types of respiratoryprotective devices — air-purifying res-pirators, air-supplied respirators andself-contained breathing apparatuses.16

Air-purifying respirators removehazardous chemicals and other con-taminants from the air. They areused only in atmospheres that con-tain sufficient oxygen to sustain lifeand that do not contain a higher con-centration of contaminants thanspecified.

Air-supplied respirators deliver un-contaminated air from an independentsource through a supply hose con-nected to the wearer’s facepiece.Many of these devices should not beused in atmospheres that are imme-diately dangerous to life or healthbecause the wearer might not havetime to leave the hazardous area if theequipment malfunctions.

Self-contained breathing apparatuses(SCBAs) provide uncontaminated airfrom a stationary source (typically atank carried on the wearer’s back).Some units, known as rebreathing de-vices or closed-circuit SCBAs, recy-cle some or all of the wearer’s exhaledair. These units weigh less than open-circuit SCBAs (which expel exhaledair to the surrounding environment)and can be worn in confined spaces.Pressure-demand SCBAs provide

positive pressure to prevent hazard-ous chemicals from entering the face-piece.

The NSC says that selection of prop-er respiratory equipment should bedetermined after identifying the haz-ardous substances in the air; under-standing the hazardous properties ofeach substance; determining expo-sure conditions, air-contaminant lev-els and oxygen levels; determiningwhether there are limitations to safeuse of the device; and fitting the res-pirator to the wearer. Some countriesrequire medical surveillance of work-ers wearing respiratory equipment.

PPE may be required to protect thebody — including hands and feet —against chemicals; temperature ex-tremes and inclement weather; elec-trical shock; impact; cuts, scrapes andpunctures; contaminated materials; orentanglement of regular clothing inmachinery. Depending on the hazard,protective clothing may be requiredfor the entire body or a portion of thebody.17

Impervious clothing often is re-quired for protection against chemi-cals and other hazardous substances,cuts and impacts. If protective cloth-ing is required because the workerwill be exposed to a hazardouschemical, information about the besttype of material (often some type ofrubber or synthetic fiber) to provideprotection should be available on the


material safety data sheet (MSDS)or from the supplier or manufactur-er of the chemical. Before use, wear-ers should receive training for useof the clothing, including instruc-tions on the hazards of skin contactwith the chemical, the protectivelimitations of the clothing, the con-sequences of a failure of the protec-tive clothing and how long theclothing should last before disposalor decontamination.18

In addition to PPE, personal cleanli-ness is important for workers exposedto chemicals and other substances thatmay irritate the skin. Workers shouldcomply with the recommendations ofmedical specialists about what typeof soap to use (because an incorrecttype may contribute to irritation) andwhen to use it. Skin creams also maybe recommended in some circum-stances to help replace natural oils re-moved from the skin by contact withsome substances.19

Cold-weather clothing should be se-lected both for warmth and for itssuitability in working conditions.

High-visibility clothing should beworn during the day, at night and dur-ing adverse weather by maintenancepersonnel working near moving air-craft or other moving vehicles. Insome tasks, a high-visibility vest willbe sufficient; other tasks require full-body high-visibility clothing. TheU.K. Health and Safety Executive

says in its guidelines on selection ofhigh-visibility clothing, “As a rule,the darker the conditions or work site,the greater the amount of [high-visibility] clothing required.”20

Gloves are among the most frequent-ly used types of PPE. Protectivegloves are available in many materi-als, but no single material or combi-nation of materials providesunlimited protection against hazard-ous substances. Selection of glovesshould be determined by a number offactors, including the amount of flex-ibility and touch sensitivity that willbe required to perform the task andthe potential effects of exposing theskin to the substance, including boththe immediate effect on the skin andthe potential long-term effect to theentire body of absorbing the chemi-cal through the skin. Before thegloves are worn, they should bechecked for proper fit and examinedto ensure that there are no leaks ortears. In some tasks, gloves them-selves may present risks; they shouldnot be worn while working with manytypes of machinery because they maybecome entangled in moving parts.Gloves with metal componentsshould not be worn near electricalequipment.21

Protective footwear should be worn byany employee at risk of foot injury.CCOHS said that the most commonon-the-job foot injuries result fromimpact, compression and puncture.


Protective footwear is designed toprotect against those hazards andothers, including cuts, burns and elec-tric shocks. The thickness and materi-al of the sole of the shoe should beselected according to the hazards ofthe job and the type of flooring inthe workplace. For example, techni-cians who work on concrete floors,which are unyielding and uncomfort-able, should wear shoes with thick in-sulating soles and shock-absorbinginsoles. Soles also should be slip-resistant. Some types of protectivefootwear include steel toe caps to pro-tect the feet against impacts of fallingobjects.22

Employers and maintenance person-nel must consider several otherfactors before determining the suit-ability of PPE for a particulartask. Among those factors arethe length of time that PPE will beworn, the physical effort requiredto perform a task, requirements forthe worker to communicate with oth-ers, the general health of the workerand whether one item of PPE is com-patible with other items being wornsimultaneously.23

“For example,” HSE guidelines said,“does the use of a particular type ofrespirator make it difficult to get eyeprotection to fit properly?”

Some types of clothing and accesso-ries present particular risks andshould not be worn in the workplace.

A military aviation publication, forexample, has cited the injury riskspresented by jewelry, accompaniedby photographs of the left hand of amaintenance technician whose fin-ger was severed because the ring hewas wearing was caught on a doorhinge when the technician slippedwhile exiting an aircraft cockpit.24

“All jewelry, including personaladornments such as rings, bracelets,bangles, earrings, necklaces/medal-lions are considered likely to presenta potential hazard to personnel work-ing on aircraft, aircraft equipmentor operating powered machinery,tools or equipment,” the magazinesaid. “They are to be removed beforecommencing work.”25

Jewelry items could become trappedin moving equipment, pulling thewearer toward the moving parts, orbecome attached to the edges ofequipment or aircraft, presenting thewearer with a risk of strangulation,injury or loss of limb.

Jewelry also presents the risk of for-eign object damage (FOD). If itemsof jewelry drop within an aircraft orother equipment, they could becomelodged in a position that could restrictmovement of aircraft controls orcould interfere with proper operationof the equipment.

Loose-fitting garments, neckties andgloves — including protective gloves


— also can become entangled inequipment and should be worn onlywhen appropriate.

Metal jewelry, including metalwristwatch straps and metal eye-glass frames, presents an additionalhazard: These items conduct electric-ity and could cause short circuits,which might injure the wearer,damage electrical equipment or causefires.

The airport maintenance environmentpresents maintenance personnel withmany risks involving exposure tochemicals, machinery and other haz-ards. Nevertheless, PPE — when usedproperly — and compliance with ef-fective safety rules can help mainte-nance personnel avoid the injuriesand impairment that can result fromhazards in the workplace.♦

Notes1. Ribak, Joseph; Cline, Betty;

Froom, Paul. “Common Acci-dents Among Airport GroundPersonnel.” Aviation, Space, andEnvironmental Medicine Volume66 (December 1995): 1188–1190.

The accidents cited in the reportinvolved accidents that resultedin at least three days’ absencefrom work. The report said thatthe annual rate of accidents was71 per 1,000 worker-years in1988, the first year of the study,

and decreased in each of the foursubsequent years to between 40accidents per 1,000 worker-yearsand 54 accidents per 1,000worker-years.

2. Vandel, Robert H. Interview byWerfelman, Linda. Alexandria,Virginia, U.S. Nov. 19, 2002.Flight Safety Foundation, Alex-andria, Virginia, U.S.

3. Canadian Centre for Occupa-tional Health and Safety(CCOHS). Designing an EffectivePPE Program. <www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/prevention/ppe/designin.html>. Nov. 13, 2002.

4. Ibid.

5. U.S. National Safety Council(NSC). Aviation Ground Opera-tion Safety Handbook, Fifth Edi-tion. Chapter 9, “PersonalProtective Equipment andGuarding.” 2000.

6. Onufer, Nicholas. Telephoneinterview by Werfelman, Linda.Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. Nov.21, 2002. Flight Safety Foun-dation, Alexandria, Virginia,U.S.

7. McCabe, William O. Telephoneinterview and e-mail communi-cation with Werfelman, Linda.Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. Nov.20, 2002, and Nov. 21, 2002.Flight Safety Foundation, Alex-andria, Virginia, U.S.


8. Flight Safety Foundation has analliance with DuPont Safety Re-sources for the performance ofsafety-evaluation services for air-lines, airports and repair stations.

9. CCOHS.

10. U.S. Occupational Safety andHealth Administration (OSHA).Eye Protection in the Workplace.<www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=fact_sheets&p_id=142>. Nov.13, 2002.

11. NSC.

12. CCOHS. Contact Lenses at Work.<www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/pre-vention/contact_len.html>. Nov.13, 2002.

13. Allen, James W. “Medical Cor-ner: LASIK and the AircraftTechnician.” Aviation Mainte-nance Volume 21 (August 2002).

14. FSF Editorial Staff. “Heredity,Disease, Aging Present Crew-members With Increased Risk ofHearing Loss.” Human Factors &Aviation Medicine Volume 47(July–August 2000).

15. CCOSH. Hearing Protectors.<www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/pre-vention/ppe/ear_prot.html>.Nov. 13, 2002.

16. Feeler, Robert A. “Correct Selec-tion and Use of Respirators IsVital in Contaminated-air Envi-ronments.” Aviation Mechanics

Bulletin Volume 42 (November–December 1994).

17. U.K. Health and Safety Execu-tive (HSE). A Short Guide to thePersonal Protective Equipmentat Work Regulations, 1992.< w w w. h s e . g ov. u k / p u b n s /indg174.pdf>. Dec. 2, 2002.

18. CCOHS. Chemical ProtectiveClothing — Glove Selection.<www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/prevention/ppe/gloves.html>.Nov. 13, 2002.

19. NSC.

20. HSE. Personal Protective Equip-ment: High-visibility Clothing forAirport Workers. <www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/apis1.htm>. Nov. 18, 2002.

21. CCOHS. Chemical ProtectiveClothing — Glove Selection.

22. CCOHS. Safety Footwear.<www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/prevention/ppe/footwear.html>.Nov. 13, 2002.

23. HSE. A Short Guide to the Per-sonal Protective Equipment atWork Regulations, 1992.

24. “Bits ‘n’ Pieces: Jewellery,Rings and Things.” Cockpit Is-sue 174 (Summer 2002): 24.Cockpit is the flight safety maga-zine published by the RoyalNavy Flight Safety and AccidentInvestigation Centre in theUnited Kingdom.


25. “It’s Happened Again — Again —Again: Rings, Jewellery, Etc.”Cockpit Issue 173 (Winter 2001–2002): 35–36.

Further Reading FromFSF Publications

FSF Editorial Staff. “Improved Un-derstanding of Human Factors CouldReduce Foreign Object Damage.”Aviation Mechanics Bulletin Volume50 (July–August 2002).

Arbon, E.R.; Mouden, L. Homer;Feeler, Robert A. “The Practice ofAviation Safety.” Flight Safety DigestVolume 20 (June 2001).

FSF Editorial Staff. “Working in,Around Aircraft Cabins RequiresAwareness of Fall Prevention.” Cab-in Crew Safety Volume 35 (January–February 2000).

FSF Editorial Staff. “Safety Special-ists Recommend Precautions forWork in Aircraft Fuel Tanks.” Avia-tion Mechanics Bulletin Volume 47(November–December 1999).

Dell, Geoff. “Survey of Airline Bag-gage Handlers Suggests Methods toPrevent Back Injuries.” Airport Oper-ations Volume 24 (September–October1998).

FSF Editorial Staff. “Knowledge ofHazardous Chemicals in the AviationWorkplace Can Help Prevent Work-related Illness and Injury.” AviationMechanics Bulletin Volume 45 (July–August 1997).

Feeler, R.A. “One Cure for Work-place Safety Complacency: SafetyChecklists.” Aviation Mechanics Bul-letin Volume 43 (September–October1995).

MAINTENANCE ALERTS

Missing Bolts Lead toIn-flight Loss ofExhaust Fairing

A Bombardier CL600-2B19 Region-al Jet en route from Minneapolis-St.Paul (U.S.) International Airport(MSP) to Cincinnati/Northern Ken-tucky International Airport (CVG)was damaged when an engine exhaust

fairing separated from the aircraft. Noone among the 43 passengers andthree crewmembers was injured in theJan. 3, 2001, incident.

Startup, taxi and takeoff from MSPwere normal. During the climb, how-ever, “an airframe vibration devel-oped,” said the incident report by theU.S. National Transportation SafetyBoard (NTSB). The aircraft’s gauges,


readouts and controls were unaffect-ed. The flight crew radioed to the air-line’s maintenance staff, but in-flightefforts to correct the problem failed.

“The flight continued, and the vibra-tion remained unchanged until theairplane leveled off at 7,000 feet[2,135 meters] during the approachto [CVG],” the report said. “At thattime, the crew felt a bump, and thenthe vibration completely ceased.”

The airplane was landed and was tax-ied to the gate.

Inspection revealed that the no. 1 ex-haust fairing was missing and that theleft, aft fuselage had a dent nine inch-es (23 centimeters) below the verti-cal stabilizer.

“According to a [U.S.] Federal Avia-tion Administration (FAA) inspector,the engine was removed after the in-cident and taken to the company’smaintenance facilities, where an in-spection was performed,” the reportsaid. “The exhaust nozzle assemblywould have normally been attachedto the exhaust frame case with 30bolts. All 30 bolts were missing, ‘withno trace.’” The exhaust frame casehad what appeared to be aluminumdeposits at about the three o’clockposition and the nine o’clock posi-tion, about six inches (14 centimeters)forward of the mating flange. Theexhaust nozzle assembly was notrecovered.

FAA requested that NTSB examinesample bolts (which were not fromthe incident aircraft) with more than6,600 hours in service. The NTSBmetallurgist who tested the used boltsand compared them to new boltsfound no evidence of cracking oroveruse in the used bolts. “The newbolts were within the tensile strengthand hardness specifications required,and the hardness and the tensilestrength results increased from thenew bolts to the used bolts,” the re-port said.

On Oct. 18, 1999, the tailpipe hadbeen removed during repairs. Themaintenance records included nomention of the bolts being changed.On May 3, 2000, the tailpipe wasloose, and 10 bolts were replaced,with the remaining bolts being re-torqued. The last inspection on theairplane was performed about twoweeks, or 105 hours, before theincident.

NTSB determined that the probablecause of the incident was “missingexhaust nozzle bolts for undeter-mined reasons. A factor was inade-quate maintenance inspection of theaffected area.”

Engine-fan Blade DefectUndetected for 10 Years

About eight minutes after takeoff fromMelbourne, Australia, on a flight to


Sydney, the crew and passengers of aBoeing 767-200 aircraft heard a loudnoise, accompanied by vibration of theairframe. The anomalies were causedby the failure of the no. 1 engine asthe B-767 climbed through Flight Lev-el 160 (approximately 16,000 feet)during the flight on Nov. 27, 2001. Theengine was shut down, and the aircraftwas returned to Melbourne.

“Engineering inspections of the [Pratt& Whitney] JT9D-7R4 engine foundthat one of the fan blades had failedpart-way along its length and impact-ed the fan case at the 11 o’clock po-sition, causing the failure of severalnose-cowl bolts and substantial dam-age to components adjacent to theimpact point,” said the technical anal-ysis report on the incident by theAustralian Transport Safety Bureau(ATSB).

The failed blade punctured the nosecowling, and a section of the bladeseparated from the cowling. A fan-speed sensor and a nose-cowling boltalso penetrated and exited from thecowling. The airframe and control sur-faces were not damaged.

“ATSB laboratory examination ofthe blade section remaining withinthe fan rotor disk found that theblade had fractured as a result offatigue crack growth from a pre-existing defect at the blade trailingedge,” said the report. “The defectwas identified as a shallow crack that

had formed during or before the lastblade-refurbishment operation, car-ried out in 1991.”

After being refurbished, the failed fanblade had been held in stock until be-ing installed in the accident engine— which had been installed previous-ly in several aircraft of different air-lines — in August 1998. “Themanufacturer’s records indicated asubsequent blade service life of 7,187hours and 2,083 cycles,” said thereport.

The trailing-edge fan-blade defectcould have been discovered by non-destructive testing following the re-furbishment, the report said.

“The engine manufacturer stated thatthe eddy-current method specified forthis inspection had the capability todetect defects well below the size ofthe actual defect present,” said thereport. “In this regard, therefore, er-ror by the inspecting technician wasthe most likely factor contributing tothe failure to detect the defect.”

The report said that the defect was toosmall to be seen by the in-service vi-sual operations required by the manu-facturer and completed by the variousoperators that had used the engine con-taining the faulty fan blade.

“An optional eddy-current inspectionof the blade by the last operator wascapable of detecting the defect, but


was not performed (nor [was such aninspection] required to be performed)along the blade trailing edge,” the re-port said.

ATSB RecommendsReview of ContinuingAirworthiness System

The Australian Transport SafetyBureau (ATSB), after a two-yearinvestigation of the withdrawal fromservice of a number of Ansett Aus-tralia Boeing 767s, has issued a se-ries of safety recommendationsintended to ensure the continuing air-worthiness of air transport categoryaircraft.

ATSB said in a Nov. 15, 2002, reporton the investigation that Ansett Aus-tralia did not conduct “certain re-quired fatigue-damage inspections ofthe aircraft structure” and that “as aresult, there was uncertainty as to thecontinuing airworthiness status of theaircraft.”

The investigation continued afterAnsett Australia ceased operations inMarch 2002 “because of the impor-tance of the issues involved for thesafety of ‘class A’ aircraft aroundthe world,” the report said. (Class Aaircraft are those with a certificate ofairworthiness issued in the transportcategory or those used for reg-ular public transport operations inAustralia.)

“The international continuing airwor-thiness system, like all complex andsafety-critical activities, is dependenton robust systems to maintain highreliability,” the report said. “The cir-cumstances surrounding the with-drawal from service of the AnsettB-767 aircraft revealed, among otherthings, that the reliability of the con-tinuing airworthiness system wasthreatened by a number of weakdefenses.”

The report said that, in addition tofinding errors made by Ansett Aus-tralia, the investigation found “deep-er system and resource weaknessesin the airline group and shortcomingsby the U.S. regulator of the aircrafttype [the U.S. Federal Aviation Ad-ministration], both of which CASA[the Australian Civil Aviation SafetyAuthority] was unaware.”

The investigation’s findings includ-ed the following:

• Although The Boeing Co.introduced in 1997 a B-767a i rwor th ines s - l imi t a t i onsstructural-inspection program todetect fatigue cracking in suscep-tible areas of the airplane, Ansettpersonnel “did not initially rec-ognize that some airworthiness-limitations structural inspectionswere required by 25,000 cycles,and a period of almost 2 1/2 yearselapsed before that error wasidentified. At the time that the


inspection program was intro-duced, some Ansett B-767 air-craft had already flown morethan 25,000 cycles. In June 2000,further 25,000-cycle inspectionswere introduced. … Ansett didnot initially act on this”;

• CASA’s “documented require-ments for maintaining an effec-tive continuing airworthinesssystem for Australian class A air-craft were not clear and unam-biguous, and that increased thepotential for a reasonable misin-terpretation and, therefore, aninconsistent application of therequirements.” The report alsosaid that CASA’s response toAnsett Australia’s problems was“not adequate.”

ATSB recommended that CASAreview the transmittal of infor-mation on aircraft faults, mal-functions and defects, and itssurveillance of Australian oper-ators of class A aircraft in theircontinuing airworthiness assur-ance activities. CASA alsoshould consider introducing aperiodic certification mainte-nance review for Australian classA aircraft, ATSB said;

• The FAA airworthiness directive(AD) that resulted in develop-ment of the B-767 airworthiness-limitations structural-inspectionprogram was issued about twoyears after the close of the

public-comment period on the is-sue. ATSB said that the delay“had the potential to result inpoor safety outcomes.”

“Timely action by the FAA in is-suing the airworthiness directivewould have had the potential toalert Ansett, CASA and otheroperators to the process [underway] to mandate the June 1997program, and of the time framespecified for compliance with theprogram,” ATSB said.

ATSB also said that FAA delayedissuing other related ADs andthat there was “potential conflictbetween the different [methods]used to develop structural inspec-tion thresholds and any relatedgrace periods.”

ATSB recommended that FAApromptly process and releaseADs that require revisions of theairworthiness-limitations struc-tural inspections for damage-tolerance aircraft types. (Dam-age-tolerance refers to the designcriteria for modern jet aircraft.)ATBS said that FAA also shouldensure that adequate systemsexist to alert nations where U.S.-designed or U.S.-manufacturedaircraft types are operated inthe event that “delays in FAArulemaking have the potential tocompromise the continuing air-worthiness assurance of thoseaircraft types.”


ATSB also recommended that the In-ternational Civil Aviation Organiza-tion (ICAO) develop standards forstates of registry to ensure that per-formance measures for continuingairworthiness standards take intoconsideration the process defined in

NEWS & TIPS

Software Tracks BatteryLaboratory Work From

Start to Finish

Battery Manager software organizesand consolidates operations for bat-tery laboratories, according to themanufacturer, Digitron Firing Cir-cuits. The Microsoft Windows 2000–based software is designed to beintegrated with Digitron Firing Cir-cuits test equipment and other stan-dard laboratory equipment.

Each battery tracked by the system isassigned a unique bar code andunique job number. Following eachjob step, the results are automatical-ly entered into the system, which in-dicates the test sequence to beperformed next. Failures during a testare flagged on the display. Any au-thorized technician can access a logthat includes every item of informa-tion about the job parameters, thebattery, the tests performed and oth-er pertinent data. The user can view

information about all phases of ev-ery battery job, the manufacturer said.

For more information: Digitron Fir-ing Circuits, 30 Shelton TechnologyCenter, Shelton, CT 06484 U.S. Tele-phone: +1 (203) 446-8000.

Intermediate-sizeTorque Wrench Offered

Enerpac has added to its line of spe-cialized torque tools an intermediate-size hydraulic square-drive torquewrench to speed and simplify bolt-ing and unbolting. The model, SQD-75-1, weighs 11.9 pounds (5.4kilograms) and produces a maximumtorque of 5,570 foot-pounds (7,553joules).

The SQD-75-1, like the other hydrau-lic square-drive torque wrenches inthe Enerpac series, features a slimnose radius and a 360-degree-swivelhose connection, which is said to fa-cilitate positioning in confined areas.

the standard and the outcome thatthe standard is intended to achieve.ICAO also should develop standardsfor the classification and format ofservice information issued by man-ufacturers of aircraft, engines andcomponents.♦


The air-purifying respirator, incorpo-rating a high-efficiency particle filter,can be combined with an optional car-tridge for further protection againstorganic vapors, sulfur dioxide, chlo-rine and hydrogen chloride fumes. Anickel metal hydride (NiMH) batterycan charge the respirator for up to 13hours of operation in high-efficiencyconfiguration and six hours of opera-tion in high-efficiency mode withprotection against organic vapors andother chemical contaminants.

The ClearVisor Face Shield meetsAmerican National Standards Insti-tute (ANSI) standards for industrialeye and face protection and U.S. Na-tional Institute for Occupational Safe-ty and Health (NIOSH) standards forrespirators.

For more information: Hörnell, 2374Edison Blvd., Twinsburg, OH 44087

A push-button drive release makespossible reversal of the square drivewithout tools.

The wrench’s housing is corrosion-resistant and is supplied with a stor-age case to guard against damage.

For more information: Enerpac, 6100North Baker Road, Milwaukee, WI53209 U.S. Telephone: +1 (262)781-6600.

Face Shield CombinesWith Air-purifying

Respirator

The ClearVisor Face Shield by Hör-nell provides complete eye and faceprotection and combined with theAdflo respirator also provides puri-fied air, in a slim, lightweight unit,said the manufacturer.

The polycarbonate ClearVisor FaceShield is said to have exceptional clar-ity and a wide field of vision and to pro-vide protection from impact hazards.

Intermediate-size HydraulicSquare-drive Torque Wrench

ClearVisor Face Shield WithRespirator


U.S. Telephone: (800) 628-9218(U.S.) or +1 (330) 425-8880.

Cable-managementSystem Eliminates

Sharp Bends

A product designed to protect and or-ganize fiber optic cables in a way thatensures maximum data transmissionoutput has been released by DeviceTechnologies. The FastDrop cable-management system is based onradius-control modules that are strongenough to accommodate large bundlesof cables, the manufacturer said.

FastDrop is said to have been de-signed with a precise 90-degreecurve, whose radius provides the cor-rect minimum bend for fiber opticcables. The product is intended toavoid too-sharp bends, which can in-terfere with signal transmission orcause fibers to break. Individual unitsconsist of polycarbonate quarter-circle forms available in three sizes:one inch (2.5 centimeters), 1.75 inch-es (4.4 centimeters) and three inches(7.6 centimeters).

FastDrop can be configured for hor-izontal cable runs or vertical cableruns, and mounted using metaltabs, screws or zinc-plated steelstrips. Two FastDrop modules canbe mounted facing one another for180-degree return loops. Accordingto the manufacturer, FastDrop is

suitable for a variety of cables andhoses in addition to fiber optics.

For more information: DeviceTechnologies, 3 Brigham St., Marl-borough, MA 01752 U.S. Telephone:(800) 669-9682 (U.S.) or +1 (508)

229-2000.

Transfer System UsesHollow Balls

Hollow balls that are 60 percentlighter than solid balls and provide6,000 pounds (2,722 kilograms) min-imum crush strength per unit are fea-tured in new ball-transfer systems byThomson Industries. The systems areideal for palletizers, air cargo and con-veyor systems, said the manufacturer.

Ball-transfer System

The transfer systems feature one-inch(2.5-centimeter) stainless hollowballs riding on smaller stainless balls.Units have a nylon-flanged base thatis said to offer easy mounting andreduced noise. No lubrication is


required. Load capacity is 25 pounds(11.3 kilograms).

Custom options for the transfer unitsare available, including nylon ballsfor low-noise or nonscuffing applica-tions; a variety of ball sizes; a varietyof housing materials, such as carbonsteel; alternate mounting configura-tions; and spring loading.

For more information: Thomson In-dustries, 2 Channel Drive, Port Wash-ington, NY 11050 U.S. Telephone: +1(516) 883-8000 or (44) 1271 334 500(Europe).

Spiral Heaters ProtectPipes From Freezing

Spiral heaters that are said to preventpipes from freezing at high altitudesand cold environments are offered byElmwood Sensors. Applications in-clude aircraft waste disposal systems,the manufacturer said.

The spiral heaters are available insingle-layer etched circuits andmulti-layer etched circuits, as well assingle-layer wire-wound circuits andmulti-layer wire-wound circuits. Con-trol devices such as thermostats, ther-mocouples and thermal fuses can bedirectly integrated into any heater as-sembly. The spiral heaters are an eco-nomical way to provide uniform heatdistribution where complete coverageof materials is not required, the man-ufacturer said.

For more information: ElmwoodSensors, 500 Narragansett ParkDrive, Pawtucket, RI 02861 U.S.Telephone: +1 (401) 727-1300.

Lightweight, CollapsibleCameras View Hidden

Locations

Newly introduced pole cameras, theXtendaCam Series from iShot Imag-ing, illuminate and view otherwiseinaccessible locations and transmit avideo signal to a monitor or recorder,said the manufacturer. They are saidto be highly maneuverable because oftheir light weight, collapsible carbon-fiber composite poles and a lockableswivel mechanism that lets the useraim the camera. Cabling is within theunit to ensure fast deployment andavoid snags, the manufacturer said.Applications include viewing aroundcorners and into cavities.

XtendaCams’ poles extend to as longas 11.5 feet (3.5 meters) and collapseto less than three feet (0.92 meter).They can be stowed in a case suit-able for transit. Various models in-clude cameras and lenses for color,monochrome, infrared or zoomviewing.

For more information: InterTest (theparent company of iShot Imaging),303 Route 94, Columbia, NJ07832 U.S. Telephone: +1 (908)496-8008.♦

Want more information about Flight Safety Foundation?

Contact Ann Hill, director, membership and development,by e-mail: [email protected] or by telephone: +1 (703) 739-6700, ext. 105.

Visit our Internet site at <www.flightsafety.org>.

Submit your nomination(s) via our Internet site.Go to http://www.flightsafety.org/merit_award.html

For more information, contact Kim Granados, membership manager,by e-mail: [email protected] or by telephone: +1 (703) 739-6700, ext. 126.

VtÄ Ä y É ÜaÉÅ|Çt à | ÉÇ á

Flight Safety Foundation

F L I G H T S A F E T Y F O U N D A T I O N B U S I N E S S

A V I A T I O N M E R I T O R I O U S S E R V I C E A W A R D

This award has been presented by the Foundation since 1975 foroutstanding service and contributions to corporate aviation safety. Theaward, which was established during an era in which the role ofbusiness and corporate aviation was expanding, recognizes individualswhose work enhances safety in this segment of the industry. Recipientshave included industry leaders, government officials, members of thenews media and researchers whose findings were especially relevant tocorporate aviation. The award includes a handsome, wood-framed,hand-lettered citation.�

The nominating deadline is February 7, 2003. The award will bepresented in Hollywood, Florida, USA at the FSF Corporate AviationSafety Seminar, April 22–24, 2003.

Documents

NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 2002 Personal Protective …by using personal protective equip-ment (PPE), including protective clothing, face shields, safety glasses or goggles, earplugs or other