777-200LR Flight Test Journal: Archives

09 December 2005

Troubleshooting on the go

Greg Lichneckert - Flight Systems Analyst

John Stoesz - Flight Analyst (WD002)

We sometimes describe the job of Flight Analyst as an in-flight trouble shooter, swapping out parts or getting something that's not working correctly to work again. There are 13 of us in Flight Test and airplane production. Although the job may vary somewhat by location, we all are points of reference and have experience with most airplane systems.

In flight test we work with almost everybody - pilots, test directors, ground operations, project and analysis engineers and shop personnel. When there's an airplane problem we try to convey what's wrong to maintenance and engineering. We don't go onboard and test systems arbitrarily; if there is a problem, we'll get a call. But we don't necessarily wait for the pilots to call us. A good description of what we do is maintain an overview; we're watching what's going on and paying special attention to what's being tested. An analyst is onboard almost every test flight, unless there are restrictions, like the first flight for airworthiness.

If we can't solve a problem on the spot, there are different ways of dealing with it. We may write a squawk or communicate with engineering and the pilots to see how we need to work and document the situation. Some problems can be fixed right away. You see things and say, "We've seen this before and this is how we fixed it." We'll talk about what the system is supposed to do and work out a solution. But there are so many variables in some of the systems that nobody is going to know it all. Some systems' software, like in the autopilot, might need to be swapped out and changed every flight.

Once we write up a problem, it is the maintenance crew's responsibility to follow through, and Quality Assurance has general oversight. Different groups - not just the analysts - are involved in the process and keep an eye on problem resolution. Sometimes the flight crew will come back to us and ask more questions about what we saw when the problem came up.

It might be fair to say, though, we actually keep track of various airplane problems and issues more than other groups. We think that is one of the reasons they like us going along on all the flights. It's a measure of continuity; we're pretty consistent. We were on more than 95 percent of the test flights for WD001 and WD002. We pretty much know what's going on.

The 777-200LR has performed amazingly well. There were no chronic problems, nothing recurring; no single common thread came through the whole program. It's a pretty clean airplane. What else we like about the work is the variety - the airplane programs are all so different!