ADDs
MHAge
I read your post at 1498 with interest. You said with regard to fixing fuel leaks that they will always be fixed "when they exceed the acceptable leak rates as laid down by Lft 11 in the 2(R)1"
I am not suggesting for one moment that this could leave an unsafe fuel leak coming out of a major servicing, but if you do not fix them when you have the skills, the equipment, the aircraft access and, hopefully, the time but instead leave them to be fixed at station, or worse detachment, level what is the gain - unless of course you are so short of time and/or resources that you have no choice.
I assume, maybe wrongly, that most of the "safe" fuel leaks are in the wing and the QinetiQ report makes some interesting comments on these issues, and particularly whether these fuel leaks are an indication of the overall structural integrity of the wing ie a "safe" fuel leak may be hiding a bigger problem. Their concerns were reinforced by the high AUW sorties being flown in support of Gulf operations.
My background is avionics, but one paragraph of the QQ report, obtained of course under FOI or I would not be quoting it, which stood out for me was:
"The recurrence of significant fuel leaks at several points on the wings of the Nimrod aircraft may be taken as an indication of the age-related deterioration of the basic sealing systems employed in the aircraft as a barrier to leakage. The breakdown of the original interfay sealants is not easily recoverable and the conventional repair processes cannot be expected to prevent or halt that deterioration. This leads to a major concern with respect to the effects of that deterioration on the overall structural integrity of the subject joints, ie corrosion."
The QQ report then offers some recommendations for more detailed examinations using aircraft going to the MRA4 programme which one has to assume the IPT will action - presumably money permitting.
Thus a policy, presumably made from on high, of deliberately sending out aircraft from major servicing with ADD'd fuel leaks even though "safe" seems to be a very short-sighted and potentially expensive (in maintenance terms if nothing else) policy, and the leaks may be more of a problem than they appear.
If I have got it all wrong I am very happy to be corrected.
JB