Is service bulletin for BAe 146 series valid for AVRO RJ as well?
 

I am doing some research regarding the cabin air quality issue and I have come across the BAe service bulletin ISB.21-150 revision 2 from October 10th, 2002. The paper says it's effectiv for all BAe 146 aircraft and it describes the work to be done after an oil fume event. Do these procedures also apply for AVRO RJ aircraft? If yes, is that because of this ISB? If not, why?
Your help is very much appreciated.

Edit: clarity

The service bulletin will list the serial numbers of the effected airframes. If the service bulletin is a "for sale" service bulletin, a service bulletin that not safety related, the owner/operator of the airframe has to pay the OEM to add the serial number to the effectivity.

However, I would assume that any service bulletin effective on the BAe 146 would have been incorporated during production on the Avro RJ's.

Thanks for your reply but I am not very much wiser yet.

I found the ISB here and the AD here.

It doesn't say AVRO RJ anywhere. Does that mean that nothing has to be done after a fume event on an AVRO RJ?

1) What paper/TV company are you working for?
2) I assume you are looking at if there is any difference in the two engine configuratuions on the 146 to RJ? The ALF502 and 507?
3) Read the SB that you are trying to interpret with clearly no technical training. As stated above, it will specify the Serial Numbers of the affected aircraft OR as in this case ALL BAe 146 aircraft.
4 As its an ISB its an INSPECTION SB so no doubt a follow up will be required and possible repeat inspections. I assume its the inspect the Air Conditioning Ducting for oil contamination inspection?

Minor point, but from what little I know of such things when considered from a technical - i.e. design authority and maintenance - perspective the BAe 146 and AVRO RJ are different aircraft. Despite the fact that they might look a bit similar.

But if you are a journo all the evidence suggests that things like that don't matter much.

I am not a journalist, check my profile. Furthermore it would be helpful if everybody who hasn't got a clue would stay away from this thread. Thanks.

I would be very grateful if somebody with an engineering background could shed some light on this matter. For me it looks like the ISB and the AD are valid for the BAe 146 only. So where is the regulation regarding oil fumes on the AVRO RJ?

We can put whatever we want in our public profiles.:D

If you truly are a Captain on the RJ/AVRO and have a fume event, put it in the tech log and let a licensed engineer deal with it. That's what he's trained for.

@acebaxter
/quote
If you ... have a fume event, put it in the tech log and let a licensed engineer deal with it.
/unquote
Life must be wonderful and very easy in your company. In ours you better think yourself and don't rely to much on others. "Checked on ground found OK" springs to mind. Fact is that the company wants the birds in the air in the first place.

So still useful information on the subject would be highly appreciated.

The aircraft type certification uses the generic BAe146 designation; the Avro RJ is a subtype.

Re: INSPECTION SERVICE BULLETIN ISB.21-1156, this is titled “BAe 146 SERIES/AVRO 146 RJ SERIES AIRCRAFT” and therefore applies to all BAe 146 Series and Avro RJ aircraft.

Re: Airworthiness Directive 003-10-2002, this is titled as “Applicability British Aerospace BAe 146-100, -200 and -300 Series aircraft”, thus only applies to BAe146 aircraft.

The difference in the two documents in their applicability is probably that the service bulletin is published as a generic procedure that might be called-up either as a specific check or used in a scheduled maintenance program, and details how the check is to be carried out; whereas the AD specifically requires a check of all BAe146.
Incidents may have been identified in the BAe146 only, and if oil was found in the ducts and if it was judged that this might have contributed to air conditioning problems a mandated check is call for. The frequency of the check suggests the abjective was to avoid repeat incidents from any failure to clean out the ducts after an initial incident.

The mechanism of the check is maintenance good housekeeping, which IMHO suggests that some operators were not checking this area after reported oil leak events. It had also been reported elsewhere that many oil leaks originated from overfilled (over serviced) APUs, and thus the AD (CAA lacking hard evidence) took a side swipe at tardy operators to improve servicing standards and ensure that a good clean up of the Air Cond system was undertaken to prevent repeat occurrences.

@safetypee

Thank you very much for your elaborate answer.

The difference between an AD and a Service Bulletin is:

An AD has been issued by the FAA (or other reguatority agency) and has been published in the Federal Registrar which means it is now a law and must be accomplished. The AD does not provide repair or inspection instructions, that is still found in a Service Bulletin, but since the AD calls out the Service Bulletin it too now has to be accomplished. An AD can be issued for one aircraft of a entire fleet, but normally it will be issued against all already delivered, and must be accomplished at a specific time, either calander time of aircraft time or a combination of both. Aircraft still in production can have the requirements of the AD incorporated prior to
delivery.

A Service Bulletin is issued as a product improvment. The operator can choose to or to not incorporate the Service Bulletin. Again Service Bulletins can be issued for one aircraft of the entire fleet. Normally these product improvements are incorporated during production and the Service Bulletin would be effective on all previously delivered aircraft.

zweifelkeks

Pilots are paid to fly and maintenance personnel are paid to maintain (that includes whether an SB/AD is applicable to a certain type of aircraft).

Simple!

Zweifelkeks, your question is reasonable and should be of interest to all who fly or. who have flown, the fruitbat.
Seeing as you are getting nowhere with some of the unhelpful replies here, why not try an engineering thread dedicated to engineers? When you get an answer from someone who knows what they are talking about, please post here for those of us who DO care.

zweifelkeks for clarification, and the edification of others:

The BAe 146 has 3 series, 146-100, 146-200, and 146-300.

The Avro RJ has the same generic Type Certificate (ease of certification, basically the RJ is a 146 with mods) and thus is known by the CAA/FAA/EASA as the BAe146/RJ.
The RJ has 3 variants, RJ70, RJ85, and RJ100.

The industry, and the manufacturer’s sales team, treats the 146 and RJ as separate aircraft as they have different capabilities; don't confuse this with the certification regulation definition above.

Service bulletins (SB) are issued by the manufacturer for a variety of reasons; the one you refer to is an Inspection SB (ISB).
A National Authority (CAA/FAA/EASA) can issue a mandate, in this instance the UK CAA via an Airworthiness Directive (AD). The one that you refer to only applies to the BAe146 series and calls for an inspection using the content of the ISB. The fact that the ISB can be used on either the BAe146 or the Avro RJ is irrelevant as far as the AD is concerned, as the AD only applies to the BAe146.

If a crew of an RJ have a cabin odour event and suspect that the APU was over filled (post #9), then maintenance action using the SB would be a good idea. However, some tact might be required in putting this suggestion to maintenance; you fly, they maintain.

Odours in the Air Con system can come from other sources, e.g. de icing fluid through the APU intake, or directly into the cabin via recirc (hydraulic leak, galley/toilet smells). If any of these substances has remained in the Air Cond ducts then the smell can reoccur; thus, using the SB to clear the ducts is also a good idea for any odour event.

If you report an event, provide the maintenance team with a clear description of when the event occurred (the stage of flight / power setting), what the cabin air source was (APU or engine), and what the temperature settings were on the Air Con Packs – these effect the air flow, particularly if selected to a maximum value just after selecting APU air / first flight of the day.
Describe the smell as this can help identify the source; a ‘sweet smell’ could be de-icing fluid, ‘sweaty socks’ is usually old oil, new oil might be more ‘caramel’ and may cause some smoke.
Fixing the cause of the problem should prevent any new events; cleaning the ducts prevents a reoccurrence (reactivation) of any old contaminant.
Do the job once and do it right first time, this will keep the crew happy and the cabin clean.

After posting I note safetypee's preceding post and suggest that the two be read in conjunction ...

zweifelkeks should make a phone call to the CAA to get authoritative information.

However, a quick net search provides copies of

(a) BAe ISB.21-150 which indicates applicability to the 146 series only

(b) UK CAA CAP476 and 477 which indicate that the ISB has the status of an AD

(b) UK TCDS BA 16 which relates to both the 146 and RJ and distinguish between the 146 and RJ series.

Questions arising - are there any material differences between

(a) the engine types
(b) the aircon systems

on the two series ?

I note that there are other net references which appear to indicate that some operators lump the two series together in respect to smoke and fumes crew guidance.

I'll put a link on the engineers forum and see if we can attract some Type specific knowledge to this thread.

The only way to verify what aircraft the service bulletin is applicable too is to read item 1. Planning Information, A. Effectivity section.

The AD mentions only BAe 146 series aircraft.

It is not clear as the copy of the SB being referenced is unformatted; but if memory serves me correctly, as I am no longer working on the BAe 146, the "BAe 146 / Avro RJ" title at the top of the page is just a generic header for the aircraft family of the SB publications.

The actual effectivity is detailed further in the SB and only refers to BAe 146 (and so not Avro RJ). But as other posts have well stated, the clear effectivity can be determined by reading the actual SB itself, and not the summary, against the aircraft serial numbers. Hope this helps.

When asking a question it is useful to possess the basic knowledge required to understand the answer.

As an ex Tech Author, who used to write aircraft service bulletins, I can say that the ones I wrote included c/n's, which made for no doubt as to which aircraft the bulletin was applicable.

As someone previously eluded to, if the bulletin says all BAe146 aircraft and yours is an RJ type, the SB does NOT apply to you. All of the mandatory SB's would have been incorporated prior to certification as an RJ series aircraft unless the item/system/whatever had been changed beforehand.