Glad,
Thank you. You are bang on the money there. FOD is certainly generated on traditional airframe final assembly lines, but having seen and worked around a number of US and UK examples, I'd say that overall US lines tended to be cleaner and more FOD free. There were also big variations between UK companies.
One measure that I know helped was having assembly jigs and fixtures equipped with built in vacuum cleaners and FOD bins so that locking wire cut off and swarf could be safely removed as it was generated. I once tried to get this idea installed on a UK assembly line, only to be told that it would cause a strike as only union approved cleaners could operate vacuum cleaners.
Engine final assembly lines should, in my view, be absolutely FOD free. Unless locking wire is being used (rare these days) there should be NO material left over from assembly, and the place should be surgically clean. I was appalled to see that a UK engine assembly line (RR East Kilbride) had open bins of nuts and bolts next to the Pegasus assembly line, with no control over how many were used. Plus scarf and locking wire scrunching under our feet. Both RAF and RN assembly lines used 'kit control', where the right number of nuts and bolts were issued to build teams when required, and no additional items were issued without a very good explanation.
When challenged, RR's explanation as that FOD control 'wasn't as important', as they had a just had the MoD pay for a new stand to turn the engines over and listen for FOD. Gawd.
Hempy, I can absolutely assure you that the JPO know who is paying the bills. This is a massive and highly complex project, not helped by the fact that it has to serve two customers (USAF and USN/USMC) who have very different views on how this aircraft is to enter service and be supported. Add in three variants, a good few export customers, and you should get an idea of the challenges they face.
Yes, I know that this is what they are supposed to be doing, and it's what they planned - but as I've often posted, unexpected stuff happens, and mistakes get made. The JPO has had excellent leaders, and some less than excellent - for what it's worth. I think Bogdan's doing a good job.
The really onerous oversight they are subjected to is that from Congress and organisations like the GAO. I'd be more than happy to see a similar level of attention paid to UK defence projects, plus a similarly informed defence press. It might help stop some of the really epic fails the UK Armed Forces have had to put up with. Sadly, most defence reporting in this country doesn't get much past the 'Beano' level.
Best regards as ever to those actually cleaning up the FOD
Engines