Not considered to be practicable
Thanks Da4orce
It would appear that the recommendations have not all been carried out then 3 years later.
Recommendation
A maintenance policy should be instigated for the ruptured duct and all similar ducts.
Action Taken
A study into the need for a preventative maintenance/lifing policy for this and similar ducts has been concluded by the Designer (BAE Systems). Their report, which is due to be issued imminently, is based on the results of a detailed analysis of a sample of ducts taken from a number of MR2 aircraft. This analysis has taken time to complete, but the report is expected to recommend that a lifting policy be introduced. Ducts due for replacement would be replaced during scheduled maintenance activities and it is anticipated that such a duct replacement programme would be in place by December 2007. Action ongoing.
So no duct replacement until after December 2007 them Mmmm
Recommendation
The extent of the hot air leak warning system is reviewed to ensure that all possible duct failures are covered.
Action Taken
Recommendation closed. A review of the aircraft warning systems revealed that the affected Supplementary Cooling Pack Duct was the only duct whose failure would not have been detected.
So despite the fact that they recommended extending the warning system to ensure it covered all duct failures, nothing was done Mmmm
Recommendation
A hot air leak warning system is introduced for the ruptured duct and cross-air bleed ducts.
Action Taken
Recommendation rejected. The duct failure was an isolated incident and was in the only part of the system where a leak would not have been detected. All of these ducts have been replaced with newly manufactured items that, based upon the previous 25 fault-free years that the original duct had been fitted, are expected to last well beyond the planned MR2 Out of Service Date (early part of the next decade). Moreover, fitting a discrete hot air leak warning system would be a complex modification that would have to be embodied across the fleet during its maintenance cycle and therefore take several years to embody. Considering the Out of Service Date of the Nimrod MR2, the fitting of such a system was not considered to be practicable. Action closed.
So no hot air leak warning system then Mmmm
It appers then that the unit inquiry didn't make much difference to safety then. Lets hope the BOI's findings don't go down the same way then.After all the Consideried Out of Service Date of the Nimrod MR2 is even closer now , so I wonder if making any changes will be deemed as not considered to be practicable.
Until then I wait, I listen, I learn, I collect factual information , I ???????