(12)
`
`United States Patent
`Sinex
`
`(10) Patent N0.:
`(45) Date of Patent:
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`US006606546B2
`
`(54) AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
`MANAGER
`
`(75) Inventor: Barry SineX, Duluth, MN (Us)
`
`'
`.
`-
`-
`(73) Asslgnee' SIlJnSeX Holdmgs’ LLC’ Duluth’ MN
`(
`)
`
`.
`( 4 ) Notice:
`
`.
`.
`.
`.
`SubJect' to any disclaimer, the term of this
`Pawnt 1S mended 0r adlllsted under 35
`U-S-C- 154(b) by 460 days-
`
`6/1999 Isherwood ................. .. 705/37
`5,918,219 A
`8/1999 Chapin, Jr. ................ .. 701/30
`5,931,878 A
`6,003,808 A 12/1999 Nguyen et al. ..
`244/1 R
`
`. . . .. 702/184
`6,006,171 A 12/1999 Vines et al. . . . . . . . .
`..... .. 701/29
`6,067,486 A
`5/2000 Aragones et al.
`6,092,102 A
`7/2000 Wagner .................... .. 709/206
`6,125,312 A
`9/2000 Nguyen et al. ............. .. 701/35
`6,148,297 A 11/2000 SWor et al. . . . . . .
`. . . . .. 70/3
`
`.. 340/971
`6,150,959 A 11/2000 Germanetti ..
`_____ __ 455/66
`6,173,159 B1 * 1/2001 Wright et aL
`340/506
`6,246,320 B1 * 6/2001 Monroe
`6,246,341 B1 * 6/2001 Germanetti ............... .. 340/946
`
`(21) Appl. N0.: 09/728,579
`.
`_
`(22) Med‘
`(65)
`
`Dec‘ 1’ 2000
`Prior Publication Data
`
`US 2001/0032114 A1 Oct. 18, 2001
`
`Related US. Application Data
`(60) Provisional application No. 60/168,400, ?led on Dec. 1,
`1999_
`(51) Int C17
`
`G0 1 C 21/00
`
`.
`(58) Fleld
`
`(52) US. Cl. ....................... .. 701/29; 340/439; 340/500;
`340/971; 395/50; 395/60; 705/26
`Agog/7232(1)’
`60 614’ 61’5_ 705/26f 707’/103 ’104_’235/375’
`’
`’
`’
`’
`’
`’
`References Cited
`
`(56)
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`5,216,612 A
`5,454,074 A *
`5,778,381 A
`5,828,969 A
`
`364/468
`6/1993 Cornett et al. ............ ..
`395/161
`9/1995 Hartel et al.
`707/104
`7/1998 Sandifer ......... ..
`10/1998 Chamney et al. ........... .. 701/29
`
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`“Ground—Support Equipment”, Anonymous, Air Transport
`World, vol. 31, N0. 10, pp. 107—113, Oct. 1994.
`“American reduces GSE Costs”, Airports International, p.
`29, Oct. 29, 1994.
`
`* cited by examiner
`_
`_
`Primary Examufler—Thomas G‘ Black
`Asststant Examzner—Tuan C To
`(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm—Kinney & Lange, PA.
`
`ABSTRACT
`(57)
`f
`.
`ft
`. t
`.
`f
`A t
`sys em or managing an a1rcra mam enance program or
`an aircraft operated by an operator includes means for
`extracting maintenance tasks for the aircraft from at least
`one aircraft maintenance document, means for sorting the
`maintenance tasks into initial maintenance task groups hav
`ing common control points, and means for guiding the
`airline operator to organize the maintenance tasks and initial
`maintenance task groups into a plurality of maintenance task
`groups.
`
`20 Claims, 19 Drawing Sheets
`
`100
`
`M
`
`102——
`
`Receive "‘ '
`
`Program
`1
`
`1 04——
`Add Non-Routine Tasks
`
`J.
`106** Receive and Track
`Accumulated Time Data
`for each Aircraft
`
`l
`
`108*
`T Receive and Log Task
`Accomplishment Data
`
`110——
`Compare
`Accumulated Time Data
`
`Task Due Data
`
`1
`112—— Report on Tasks
`Approaching Their
`Time Control Point
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 1
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 1 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`1 2—_
`
`Aircraft
`
`Aircraft _'_'_l 4
`§ Maintenance
`§ Requirements
`
`Use
`Pref r :1
`20__ e e ces
`
`10
`
`Program
`Manager
`
`28
`
`l
`
`Reliability
`Manager
`
`24
`
`|
`
`Tracking
`Manager
`
`Dynamic
`Aircraft
`Maintenance
`Production
`32—_' Personnel / Manage!‘
`Electronic _—30
`Training —H\ Publications
`Manager
`Manager
`26
`
`“"99”
`Trammg
`Records
`
`I
`
`FAA Training
`Requirements
`I
`
`1
`
`16
`
`I
`
`18
`
`H61 1
`[IFS/‘6M OVERV/EW)
`
`'
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 2
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 2 of 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`42—-
`Extract Aircraft Data
`
`40
`//
`
`44 ”“
`
`46———-—
`
`User Select
`MSG-2 Logic or
`MSG-3 Logic
`i
`Organize Tasks into
`Master Maintenance
`Program
`
`48-
`Planner Modi?cations to
`Maintenance Program
`
`H62
`6m’ BMW/414M165?)
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 3
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`2
`
`2B6
`
`
`
`Em:o_mm_:ton_ auEm_>_oz: E:eBm:.e_EE_e< finxucfizemz:o_mme®5m:£S§<lWQ.w
`
`
`
`
`
`9ooowmeow?w_H.eeevwoew?ow
`
`ooowmeow?w.Wooowwoew?w_
`
`pm__V_§_o5:ooowooow?w_
`
`9_8._o.<
`
`oooveoow:ow?9B:<%o_ew?_wono_<M.eeow?_wooo<wooow?9we%woew?9
`
`ooowoeo¢w_ew?o,emwZ
`
`
`
`eee¢Looownew?9non2
`
`w§_V_8;o5:EawoooweoevSow?9mo:<
`
`M,m.0;mweweweN?owofwewee
`
`
`
`
`6,oeewAloe?_Qow?9ee®_<W3__V_8._o8:3.eoov+noee¢Qow?o.noe_<
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 4
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 4
`
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 4 0f 19
`Sheet 4 of 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`.0E.o
`
`.0
`
`Eav.3wmmSmElE0?
`
`
`o.§.:.§&o25%60518339E<gz8m_mV696niw
`
`E&.qEuwmm._mmEE0?
`
`O.%_§§o933605:B:-2§§<gz8mmV693miw
`
`HEH“2
`
`
`
`zocfimao29523m>_.SmfiQmEgmEm%>o:2Em0395
`
`
`mu>_m>V62:mz:ZMDHMM12$M08548Z_<MQ@tu>OTK
`
`
`
`O.@o-om-nu_m_5
`
`Q.:oBmcmio
`
`NTK
`
`sEEto-mcoz.§s3%.36m§<<m:§<EE8525%V696
`
`
`
`
`
`Q.3x_S§:<06233x§.6&<mm:65SQ§_§.$
`
`
`
`
`
`>3_un>o%Em:o.5m§\_uEEoouLm.L®:_3ubmu5:mC\_on®Eux6uo<
`
`
`
`Q.58668%23EmfiV3668-8»
`
`
`
`
`
`Mood2.95m:om<m_o<dmEumka
`
`<
`
`
`
`26$3__§.8_6»%t<mz_<2V696®Q-¢N
`
`o.3_§_SE2QNEE22:M63moéw
`
`ems?
`
`
`
`
`
`m3900-30-03mm.gos_-B&0802266&9,6%
`
`
`
`
`
`$0:oEmEEmxn_m3mM>®:__m2o:_.u:oNSt.*0m6:m.___n>Sm,._m.:Lupxu
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Eatfi-mogmoz_g.<.m;_.m_mN_;_E<Em;.<uE,m_m>-nmmmzow
`
`
`
`
`
`_$ooo-mmQ-om_no622
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-uL.u$mLS.mLn:umx31_o>St.+0:e_pmE:\_mxu_m:m.Sm::a:_u_.__6:0
`
`38_
`
`
`€_,__£mwhzwuu.natm:_3on.6E96.6.62%mmmsomEm_2§_
`
`
`
`
`
`rim\_.9$0u_.:o_ponmLuuzuomg;5oo:m___u>Sm_mEBkuEétuum:O-m¢TOKN
`
`
`
`
`
`Si66uo:m_:u>_:m_mEupxmEQEL-2EZmuog-mmmmzom
`
`
`
`72:0:o_n_m___mpmE
`
`_._m.>oEuL
`
` Q
`<I
`
`<N
`
`
`
`
`
`\C8.m>m_02$onu3mo__&<-Eoz<tomm_:m92$,fig:pu__£.mmo-_n_-o_nm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`M
`
`Km
`
`mm
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 5
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 5 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`100
`,/1/
`
`102—-
`Receive Maintenance
`Program
`l
`
`1 04——
`Add Non-Routine Tasks
`
`l
`
`106——_ Receive and Track
`Accumulated Time Data
`for each Aircraft
`
`10&—— _
`Recelve and Log Task
`Accomplishment Data
`
`Compare
`110——
`Accumulated Time Data
`to
`Task Due Data
`
`l
`1 12—— Report on Tasks
`Approaching Their
`Time Control Point
`
`FIG. 5
`(re/Iowa MANAGER)
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 6
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 6 of 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`6%®®N¢N
`
`63mmfim
`
`6;23%
`
`6%mm\nm\m
`
`PE
`
`63wmmnm
`
`6:89mm
`
`6%oo\®m\m
`
`
`
`66;Emfim
`
`6%mm\mm§
`
`63mmtm
`
`63mmnmm
`
`PE
`
`6?80%
`
`P.r_
`
`6:mimm
`
`6%mm\m§
`
`asmmmwm
`
`63mmnnm
`
`6;_.m.m_mN
`
`6%mmmmm
`
`6%mm\mw§
`
`®m_M:.53M._.m
`
`zoE_66mm5
`
`
`
`
`
`mmopm.o._3u_.:um.u_6__m_>.626Dune§o.G>_um:ummm.6__Q-:®-Q_Nm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.me._nEu_u_m:6_3.:_LoonDunn>>0L0\.._0mEDmmNL:Q»Z®-Q_,Nm
`
`
`
`
`
`._m>oEP_€_:__LoonmS_:.coM.mm:_fi:6.newmmoumm::u:_u_.__
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`‘sous?m:__u:_u:_.m6.EuEu_u_N:LOP_.:sown;ummommm:O-N_®-OmNm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`scum;nmmumo_._._uo:m___u>.Sm_mE3.xo_.Eo+_uLmNO.N_®-QNNm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.om<.662.m<..:<.:<_m<.m<_6e6%_Em6mE6_
`
`.69EEE6
`
`
`
`
`
`Eooowm_6z6%_Em6mo&
`
`
`
`
`
`.66S6E%n3_m_>66:66.6;6666mmm6-m_m-Qmmm
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`.6s%e66n3_m_>66%693m6-n_m-onmm
`
`
`
`
`
`.®_<.n_<.m<.n<_626%_EMEQLL
`
`
`
`.uEm¢§ou:_3
`
`
`
`
`
`._m>oEo._§=__Loom.mP__:wnM.®EN.¢
`
`
`
`
`
`Eooomm_6>_6%_E«cmEL
`
`
`
`
`
`.ou_QQO®_mE3:_rCNL®O.._m
`
`
`
`
`
`$000+»_m>._mu:_Em6mEm
`
`M6658
`
`_m>_up:_m—O-:®-O—Nm
`
`EQOQ
`
`:o-:m-o_mm
`
`o¢QOO¢N
`
`_m>Luu:_
`
`m6-m_m-ommm
`
`Eooowm
`
`:m>LwuE
`
`NN»\
`
`m5-m_m-ommm
`
`ou_QQQ®
`
`_mEmu:_
`
`:o-mE-ommm
`
`Eooomm
`
`_m?_uur__
`
`mmo-m§-ommm
`
`_m.?_uu:_
`
`800$
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 7
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 7
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 7 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`xugm cum; zommmum
`
`N .2
`
`
`
`6298 9 s?s. .6 88; 009 55s, a QQQNBQ: E 25 963
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 8
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12,2003
`
`Sheet 8 of 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`1 62——
`
`Extract Fleet
`Data
`
`160
`
`flee
`(WP mmam)
`
`164—
`
`Sort Tasks into
`Zones
`
`l
`1 66—— Computer
`Generate
`Proposed Flow
`l
`168—— Planner
`Modifications to
`Proposed Flow
`l
`1 70—— Assign Tasks
`According to
`Flow
`
`172
`
`l
`Track Time
`Entries
`l
`174— _' Estimate Time
`Remaining on
`Incomplete Tasks
`l
`176— _ Passdown Notes
`and Corrective
`Actions
`
`178
`
`l
`Inspection
`Feedback
`
`180—
`Add Non-Routine
`Tasks
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 9
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 9 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`790
`i
`
`794
`
`U6248 tatua
`
`Production
`
`/%
`
`LOG OFF
`
`Mailing
`
`A
`
`
`
`X00 \
`
`5 4 5 6 7 a 9 1O 11
`
`
`
`Day 11 of 25 12 15 14 15 1e 17 18 19 20 21
`
`24 25 26 27 25 29
`
`20591 Currant Eatimatad Hours
`
`15000 Projected H ours
`
`COUNT ESTIMATED HOURE
`
`ACTUAL HOURS
`
`°/.,COMF’LETE
`
`CHECK ETATUE
`
`05E
`
`109
`
`Non-Estimated
`
`254
`
`otala
`
`2156
`
`[2:Ccr1ter Wings
`15: Her. Stabilizer
`
`i4: N055 Section
`
`[5: Mid Fuselage
`
`i6: Var. Stabilizer
`7: Enginea
`i 5: F‘yloria
`
`i 9: Other
`
`Mechanics
`
`|
`
`2/8
`
`“
`
`v26
`
`F169
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 10
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 10 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`oiwc
`
`mmw
`
`
`
`/l\\|l NAN 1k
`
`\ \ \
`
`11%
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 11
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12,2003
`
`Sheet 11 of 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`DLopoun_m:_
`
`D DDn
`
`ED
`
` _ULMTQEEC&__>>£7
`
`
`
` UDv_u:mw_E335:.K=<_u:umz
`LUu£U_M—;uu_2
`
`D9:
`
`CiM EX. 1015 Page 12
`
`
`
`.m§u._u:<_.5>
`
`83NEo<LEGOmmozmm;
`
`u-oommm-m¢-mn DDDDUDID_uDE:
`
`
`1_opoun_m:_Lu_,_m_2:om__2,£1ficmu>;_..._L_._§:E_<E63bfieuV_mm_._u_:_2Eon}
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`¢.®mnm-m_-m1 DDDn_DIUDD09:
`
`
`..opoun_m:_.:,0.832:332:3_<_6:6§_.axEo_Mx6£:_§..;uu_2
`
`
`
`w:mmau<::>-6:Mdmz_,m0z_>>
`
`
`
`
`
`.m3uL_u:<20>
`
`.m§P_u:<20>
`
`
`
`
`
`022$10:n_<fi.56&2.oomR.-m_-mn
`
`
`
`
`
`n_n_In_n_DLopoua_m:_1_u_Lm§:om_§.2:332:3_<_6§§_Lo\.Eu_MV_m.mtu_3_2Z322
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`+zms_z@_mm<256
`
`.m3P;u:<20>
`
`368:<30
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 12
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 12 0f 19
`Sheet 12 of 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`E8622,)
`
`E80:62
`
`E30:62
`
`$6;
`E_.o_u_
`
`
`
`Fzm_2z®_mm<Fzmuuao
`
`:_u__<nEO®O._
`g E E
`HE6&6:
`
`36$__<no.0
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Qmv_M<_>_....<mM<20._mmF._.u_<\m_Q_®MmQZ3®<mM<zmoz,4<wm_>mmmu,nmo-m©m\.m-:-m1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`M.EmMM<\>._>-u_._Mfimzrmozi¢®mnm-m_-mn
`
`
`
`®Z_w__<u_Va:“EdF4L®Z_OQmm.N-mTNfi
`
`
`
`Lo\.Eumm.:_.:E_<.2
`
`
`
`§.8%:_.:_n__<._2
`
`
`
`
`
`:om____mo.LS.oumm:_.:_n__<.2
`
`CiM EX.1015 Page 13
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 13
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 13 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`D t0 £20m
`
`
`
`
`
`“6361250 2236165 REE
`
`6:385}
`
`6:02
`
`E
`
`
`
`:QBQUFM O ‘559:3 O £0391 23350 O immuu @
`
`Luncofog
`
`T QM
`
`QmwwMUOML Z_ MEG;
`
`gm
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 14
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 14 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`
`
`QM<U mmac.
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 15
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 15 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`i .U _ L R). N6» 65
`
`/o® EON \mmw: 85:36
`
`
`
`who“
`
`
`
`65 $636; BEN.
`
`vmm/
`
`
`
`BEQQQQQQ $69660
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 16
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 16 0f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`<1]
`
`I
`
`>
`
`(n15
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 17
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`uA
`
`002291g
`
`91f071teehS
`
`/0nu
`
`2B/045,
`
`3m...<Q
`
`OOQN\mN\®
`
`L_®.Q_m._.m@tX86
`
`
`
`MMOQ(Q0
`
`D_§_=§m
`
`
`
`n_o.o©_nmw‘mm.m_:QVNWD
`
`Pamcummzowafiezes
`
`we\..v®O_mm$100009
`
`
`
`momma2.zmEw§EmufiomumCz<am_~6m_o
`
`zo:<3<>m
`
`
`
`
`
`LOLLUEzufitkmm;pug»Eweomo_o
`
`
`
`
`
`/09to._u>.6L6_uupu_LEoU:o_uounm:__mB_:_Smzoz
`
`
`
`:o_uuo_,uw_O._u>c:.S»O:o_uu<u>Eou.CooOgfimuw.O
`
`mmmmoommZ_fie:
`
`CiM EX.1015 Page 18
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 18
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12,2003
`
`Sheet 18 6f 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`>6;
`
`
`
`
`
`28M; tow? __.> @6236 D 66.5w 3%: 4//
`
`
`
`
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 19
`
`

`
`U.S. Patent
`
`Aug. 12, 2003
`
`Sheet 19 of 19
`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`332—_ Receive
`Prioritized List
`of Tasks
`
`334——
`Receive Personnel
`Training Data
`
`33
`
`Are
`Resources
`Suf?cient to
`Timely
`Complete
`Check?
`
`330
`
`Match Tasks with ‘
`Best Skilled
`Employees
`
`Yes
`
`i
`Match Tasks With ——338
`Both Untrained and
`Trained Employees
`
`A
`
`FIG . 18
`(A070 ASS/6N)
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 20
`
`

`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`1
`AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
`MANAGER
`
`CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED
`APPLICATIONS
`
`This application claims priority from Provisional Appli-
`cation No. 60/168,400, filed Dec. 1, 1999 for “Computerized
`Aircraft Maintenance Tracking Programming System” by
`Barry Sinex. Reference is hereby made to the following
`applications, which were filed on even date with the present
`application: “Dynamic Aircraft Maintenance Management
`System”, by Barry Sinex, application Ser. No. 09/728,773,
`filed Dec. 1, 2000 which is now U.S. Pat. No. 6,442,459;
`“Aircraft Maintenance Tracking System”, by Barry Sinex,
`application Ser. No. 09/728,774, filed Dec. 1, 2000, which is
`now 6,418,361; “Dynamic Aircraft Maintenance Production
`System”, by Barry Sinex, application Ser. No. 09/734,319,
`filed Dec. 1, 2000; “Dynamic Assignment of Maintenance
`Tasks to Aircraft Maintenance Personnel”, application Ser.
`No. 09/727,671, filed Dec. 1, 2000 by Barry Sinex; and
`“Dynamic Management of Aircraft Part Reliability Data”,
`by Barry Sinex, application Ser. No. 09/728,565, filed Dec.
`1, 2000.
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`invention relates to the field of aircraft
`The present
`maintenance. More specifically, the present invention relates
`to a system and method for managing an aircraft mainte-
`nance program for an aircraft operated by an operator.
`Aircraft maintenance occupies a key position in airline
`operation because such maintenance is essential to the safety
`of passengers and the reliability of airline schedules. Each
`aircraft has its own maintenance requirements which are
`designed to keep the aircraft in an airworthy condition.
`These aircraft maintenance requirements typically originate
`from the aircraft’s manufacturer, and can be revised
`throughout
`the life of the aircraft by the aircraft
`manufactures, the Federal Aviation Administration
`and/or the Maintenance Review Board (MRB).
`These aircraft maintenance requirements are documented
`in aircraft-specific MRB documents. An MRB document
`details each task that must be accomplished on a particular
`aircraft, the requirements of that task, and the frequency
`with which the task must be performed. The MRB document
`includes tasks that need to be accomplished anywhere from
`once a day to once every 20 years, as well as tasks that need
`to be accomplished after the aircraft has achieved a specific
`number of flight hours, flight cycles or other triggering
`indicia. For most major aircraft types, the MRB document
`lists somewhere between 800 to 2,000 different tasks.
`The MRB document details a very complicated mainte-
`nance schedule. To ensure compliance with the MRB
`document, airlines must implement various tracking pro-
`grams to monitor for the dates when tasks come due, as well
`as to log the completion of those tasks and any corrective
`actions taken.
`
`Because an aircraft produces revenue only when it is
`flying, it is essential for airline management to keep main-
`tenance time at a minimum. Thus, airlines commonly group
`tasks together (into letter-checks) rather than perform the
`tasks one at a time as they come due. Letter checks com-
`monly include “A checks”, “B checks”, “C checks” and “D
`checks”, with A checks occurring most frequently and
`having the fewest number of tasks. A and B checks typically
`can be performed overnight
`in a “line maintenance”
`environment, in which, assuming no complications arise, the
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`2
`In this
`time.
`typically loses little or no flight
`aircraft
`environment, the aircraft remains airworthy because it can
`be reassembled quickly.
`Conversely, C and D checks comprise a greater number of
`tasks, many of which require a substantial amount of time to
`complete. Thus C and D checks are typically performed in
`a heavy maintenance environment in which the aircraft is
`taken out of service. In this environment, an aircraft is taken
`into a hanger, where it is taken apart, inspected, fixed and
`reassembled during the course of one week to over a month.
`During this heavy maintenance period, non-routine tasks
`(those not detailed in the MRB document) are identified
`(often as a result of an inspection mandated by the MRB
`document), and parts that have reached their hard limits
`specified by the MRB document are replaced. Upwards of
`300 persons (including cleaners, mechanics, lead mechanics,
`inspectors and lead inspectors) may work on the mainte-
`nance of the aircraft.
`In addition, a management
`team
`including managers, supervisors, directors, production coor-
`dinators and shops managers coordinate the completion of
`the maintenance. This maintenance team typically works in
`three shifts a day, seven days a week, to complete the needed
`maintenance.
`
`To minimize the number of days the aircraft is removed
`from operation, a maintenance plan must be developed to
`assign and monitor the completion of tasks. The develop-
`ment of such a plan is made more difficult by the identifi-
`cation of non-routine tasks during the maintenance, back
`orders on parts which preclude the completion of certain
`tasks and the failure to complete timely critical path tasks
`(those which prevent subsequent
`tasks from being
`completed). No computer-based method exists to dynami-
`cally prepare such a maintenance plan using dynamically
`changing information, such as available labor hours,
`sequence and dependency of tasks, and the addition of
`non-routine tasks.
`
`Airlines can further save costs by escalating, when
`permissible,
`the intervals at which tasks are performed.
`Based upon reliability data collected by an airline during
`maintenance of their own aircrafts, the FAA may allow the
`airline to more favorably escalate tasks beyond the require-
`ments of the MRB document (i.e, require the task to be
`performed at longer intervals). Thus, if a task to inspect a
`particular part is performed as required every six months,
`and the part is consistently (throughout the fleet) in good
`condition, the task may be escalated to one a year (or some
`other interval). Such escalations of tasks can significantly
`affect the time and cost of maintaining an airline’s fleet of
`aircraft. A reliability program thus modifies, for a particular
`airline only, an aircraft’s MRB document by changing the
`intervals required between overhauls,
`inspections and
`checks of aircraft equipment. Guidance on reliability pro-
`gram elements is listed in Advisory Circular (AC) 120-17,
`Maintenance Program Management Through Reliability
`Methods, as amended,
`the Airline/Manufacturer Mainte-
`nance Program Planning Document, MSG-2/3, and/or Main-
`tenance Tasks.
`
`A reliability program can further help airlines determine
`whether individual warrantied parts have met the manufac-
`turer’s predicted life limits. Often, manufacturers of aircraft
`parts, especially engine parts, guarantee that the part will not
`fail before a specified number of hours. Thus, a reliability
`program can enable airlines to get warranty money back
`from warranty administration on that part if the part does not
`meet the manufacturer’s predicted life limits. There is no
`computer-based program for monitoring the reliability pro-
`gram of an entire fleet of aircraft as it relates to the
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 21
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 21
`
`

`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`3
`requirements of the MRB document, which uses data
`dynamically collected during the process of maintenance.
`Another aspect of an aircraft maintenance program for an
`airline is the proper training of its personnel. The FAA has
`very strict standards regarding the training required of
`aircraft mechanics. Before permitting a mechanic to perform
`a task,
`the FAA requires that
`the mechanic have been
`previously supervised doing the task or specifically trained
`for the task. The FAA additionally requires much of the
`training to be performed on a recurrent basis. Therefore,
`airlines must monitor and log all training received by its
`maintenance employees.
`Airlines must also maintain a significant number of
`publications, such as the MRB document, training manuals,
`maintenance manuals, illustrated parts catalogs, structural
`repair manuals, aircraft wiring diagrams and a general
`engineering and maintenance manual. Presently, these docu-
`ments are mostly maintained in paper format.
`No system presently exists to integrate all of the above-
`listed facets of a successful aircraft maintenance program.
`Additionally, no system presently exists to dynamically
`manage an aircraft’s MRB document, to dynamically moni-
`tor for the dates when tasks are due on an aircraft, to log the
`completion of tasks and corrective actions taken on an
`aircraft,
`to dynamically prepare a maintenance plan,
`to
`dynamically collect reliability data or to dynamically collect
`personnel training records. Accordingly, there is a need for
`a system and method for dynamically managing, in real-
`time, aircraft maintenance requirements.
`
`BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
`
`The present invention is a system for managing an aircraft
`maintenance program for an aircraft operated by an operator.
`The system includes means for extracting maintenance tasks
`for
`the aircraft from at
`least one aircraft maintenance
`
`document, means for sorting the maintenance tasks into
`initial maintenance task groups having common control
`points, and means for guiding the airline operator to orga-
`nize the maintenance tasks and initial maintenance task
`
`groups into a plurality of maintenance task groups.
`
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`
`FIG. 1 is a simplified block diagram of a system in accord
`with the present invention for dynamically managing, in
`real-time, aircraft maintenance requirements.
`FIG. 2 is a flow diagram of an MRB program manager
`component of the system of FIG. 1.
`FIGS. 3-4 illustrate example graphical user interfaces
`(GUI) used in conjunction with the MRB program manager
`component of the system of FIG. 1.
`FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of a tracking manager component
`of the system of FIG. 1.
`FIGS. 6-7 illustrate example graphical user interfaces
`(GUIs) used in conjunction with the tracking manager
`component of the system of FIG. 1.
`FIG. 8 is a flow diagram illustrating a preferred method of
`using a DAMP manager component of the system of FIG. 1
`to complete a maintenance check of an aircraft.
`FIGS. 9-17 illustrate example graphical user interfaces
`(GUIs) used in conjunction with the DAMP manager com-
`ponent of the system of FIG. 1.
`FIG. 18 is a flow diagram of an automatic task assignment
`component of the DAMP manager component of the system
`of FIG. 1.
`
`5
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`4
`DETAILED DESCRIPTION
`
`FIG. 1 is a simplified block diagram of system 10 in
`accord with the present
`invention for dynamically
`managing, in real-time, aircraft maintenance requirements.
`System 10 interfaces with a plurality of aircraft, such as
`aircraft 12, corresponding aircraft maintenance
`requirements, such as aircraft maintenance requirements 14,
`personnel training records 16, FAA training requirements
`18, and user preferences 20. System 10 is a multiple com-
`ponent system which includes Maintenance Review Board
`(MRB) program manager 22, aircraft tracking manager 24,
`Dynamic Aircraft Maintenance Production (DAMP) man-
`ager 26, reliability manager 28, electronic publications man-
`ager 30 and personnel training manager 32.
`From aircraft maintenance requirements 14, MRB pro-
`gram manager 22 extracts maintenance tasks required for
`aircraft 12 and, for each task, time control points (or limits
`by which the task must be performed). MRB program
`manager uses this information to allow an airline operator to
`organize these tasks into logical groups which can be
`simultaneously performed. MRB program manager 22 pro-
`vides the maintenance plan, along with the corresponding
`time control points, to aircraft tracking manager 24.
`Tracking manager 24 monitors accumulated time data,
`such as flight hours and cycles), and compares this data to
`the data received from MRB program manager, to report on
`which tasks are approaching their time control point. Track-
`ing manager 24 may also be used by an airline operator to
`schedule tasks during maintenance visits managed by
`DAMP manager 26.
`When aircraft 12 enters a heavy maintenance period,
`DAMP manager 26 allows airline operators to create a
`dynamic maintenance program for assigning and monitoring
`the completion of tasks on aircraft 12.
`Upon completion of a heavy maintenance period, reli-
`ability manager 28 records data relating to reliability of
`individual aircraft parts. The airline’s reliability board may
`later use reliability manager 28 to query the reliability data
`and generate reports useful for recommending changes to
`the MRB program.
`Electronic publications manager 30 is a tool which gath-
`ers the multitude of publications needed in the aircraft
`maintenance industry, and provides them in an on-line
`environment.
`
`training manager 32 provides tools for an
`Personnel
`airline operator to assign instructors, students, classrooms
`and audio visual equipment to specific training courses.
`Personnel training manager 32 further provides access from
`DAMP manager 26 to personnel
`training records 16 to
`enable an airline to know exactly when and what training its
`employees need.
`Although it
`is preferable that an airline maintenance
`program utilize each of the components included in system
`10 of FIG. 1, those skilled in the art will recognize that each
`of the individual components may be used independently,
`collectively, or in combinations of the components. Thus, an
`airline may incorporate only MRB program manager 22 and
`DAMP manager 26 with its own existing legacy system for
`monitoring when tasks are due on an aircraft.
`System Inputs
`Aircraft maintenance requirements 14, which originate
`from the aircraft manufacturer, list the tasks that must be
`accomplished on aircraft 12 and the timescale for how often
`the tasks must be accomplished in order to keep aircraft 12
`in airworthy condition. The Maintenance Review Board
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 22
`
`CiM Ex. 1015 Page 22
`
`

`
`US 6,606,546 B2
`
`5
`
`(MRB) collects this information. These requirements can be
`revised throughout the life of aircraft 12 by any of the
`aircraft manufacturer, the Federal Aviation Administration
`(FAA), the Maintenance Review Board (MRB) or the airline
`operator (with FAA approval). Aircraft maintenance require-
`ments 14 may include information regarding routine tasks,
`customer-specific tasks, FAA Airworthiness Directives,
`Manufacturer’s Service Bulletins and Letters, and other
`trackable tasks required for airline maintenance.
`Personnel training records 16 include data regarding the
`types of training each maintenance employee has received,
`and when that
`training was administered. FAA training
`requirements 18 document the training required of a main-
`tenance employee before that employee can perform speci-
`fied maintenance tasks.
`
`MRB Program Manager
`MRB program manager 22 takes aircraft maintenance
`requirements 14 and creates a maintenance program for
`aircraft 12. MRB program manager 22 allows an airline
`operator to organize all of the maintenance tasks into logical
`groups based on frequency,
`type, and an airline’s
`operational/scheduling preferences 20. As a result, MRB
`program manager 22 provides a customized maintenance
`schedule that allows the airline to not only keep track of each
`maintenance task individually, but also carry out the main-
`tenance tasks much more efficiently.
`FIG. 2 is a flow diagram 40 of MRB program manager 22
`of system 10 of FIG. 1. During its initial setup, which is step
`42, MRB program manager 22 extracts from aircraft main-
`tenance requirements 14, all of the tasks that must be
`performed on an aircraft of type aircraft 12, as well as the
`time control points (or limits by which the task must be
`performed) for each task.
`At step 44, an airline operator will select whether logic
`formula MSG-2 (Maintenance Steering Group) or logic
`formula MSG-3 MRB will be used to organize tasks. With
`logic formula MSG-2, parts are changed at standard times
`regardless of whether the part actually needs to be changed.
`Thus, under MSG-2 logic, a part is always replaced at or
`before its normal life expectancy. Conversely, under logic
`formula MSG-3, parts are not replaced until broken. MSG-3
`logic allows the MRB document to be revised based upon
`reliability data for the part during its life cycle. Thus, the
`types of tasks assigned under MSG-2 logic varies from the
`types of tasks assigned in MSG-3 logic;
`that
`is, more
`inspection tasks will be performed under MSG-3 logic than
`under MSG-2 logic, while more part replacement tasks will
`be performed under MSG-2 logic than under MSG-3 logic.
`At step 46, the extracted tasks are organized into letter
`checks, flight cycle checks (those tasks scheduled by flight
`cycles), separately tracked tasks and special tasks.
`Depending on individual requirements, at step 48, airline
`management may modify, at any time, the initial grouping of
`tasks, as long as none of the time control points, or limits by
`which a task must be performed, is exceeded by the modified
`plan.
`MRB program manager 22 preferably provides both the
`master maintenance program and the airline-modified main-
`tenance program, along with the corresponding time control
`points, to aircraft tracking manager 24.
`FIG. 3 illustrates example graphical user interface (GUI)
`50 used in conjunction with MRB program manager 22 of
`system 10. In the example of FIG. 3, the tasks of a test
`aircraft are organized into a plurality of checks including A
`checks 52. Other types of checks not illustrated in FIG. 3 are
`C checks, eight-year checks, flight cycle checks, and special
`checks. In GUI 50, column 54 lists the name of each check.
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`40
`
`45
`
`50
`
`55
`
`60
`
`65
`
`6
`Column 56 details the number of tasks included within each
`
`of the plurality of checks. Column 58 details the forecasted
`hours required to complete each task. Column 60 lists the
`form number of each task. Columns 62 list the time control
`
`points (or interval periods at which each of the plurality of
`checks is to be performed). The time control point may be
`listed as a specific number of flight hours, flight cycles or
`months. For each of the plurality of checks, buttons are
`provided to allow an airline operator to revise the checks
`(“Revise” button in column 64), view the tasks within the
`check (“View” button in column 66), or generate a checklist
`of the tasks within the check (“Checklist” button in column
`68).
`FIG. 4 illustrates example graphical user interface (GUI)
`80 used in conjunction with MRB program manager 22 of
`system 10. GUI 80 illustrates a partial listing of tasks 82 to
`be performed in conjunction with a selected one of Achecks
`52 of FIG. 3. Tasks 82 within selected A check 52 are
`
`organized by region of the aircraft, such as “upper fuselage
`above cabin floor” and “tailcone & empennage group”. For
`each task 82 listed in GUI 80, column 84 provides a task
`number, column 86 provides a task description, column 88
`provides the task’s official MRB interval (or time control
`point), column 90 provides an approximation of the amount
`of time required to perform the task, column 92 provides the
`task type, and column 94 provides the zone in which the
`work is to be performed. Details of each task 82 can be
`revised by selecting the corresponding “Revise” button
`provided in column 96.
`In a preferred embodiment, MRB program manager 22
`will include data converters to convert information stored in
`
`an airline’s legacy system into a format usable by MRB
`program manager 22.
`Aircraft Tracking Manager
`Aircraft
`tracking manager 24 functions as an aircraft
`scheduling tool by keeping track of all maintenance activi-
`ties accomplished on aircraft 12. Tracking manager 24
`receives a maintenance program as an input from MRB
`program manager 22, tracks the amount of accumulated time
`for each maintenance task, and outputs tracking information
`in the form of a status report. If tracking manager 24 is used
`independently, the maintenance program is input from air-
`craft maintenance requirements 14.
`FIG. 5 is a flow diagram 100 of tracking manager 24 of
`system 10. At step 102, tracking manager 24 receives the
`maintenance program. Preferably, MRB program manager
`22 provides the master maintenance program, the airline-
`modified maintenance program, and corresponding time
`control points to aircraft tracking manager 24.
`At step 104, non-routine tasks are added to the mainte-
`nance program, thereby allow both routine and non-routine
`tasks to be tracked. When a non-routine task is generated, it
`is linked to a particular routine task (the performance of
`which resulted in the non-routine task). Reliability manager
`28 may then use that relationship to determine whether a
`maintenance interval for a part can be escalated, or if it needs
`to be de-escalated.
`
`At step 106, tracking manager 24 keeps track of infor-
`mation such as how many flight cycles, flight hours and time
`aircraft 12 has accumulated. When integrated with MRB
`program manager 22,
`tracking manager 24 ensures that
`aircraft 12 is not flown through one of its maintenance
`limits. Tracking data may be automatically entered into
`tracking manager 24 by an automated system installed
`aboard aircraft 12 or manually by airline ground crews.
`Manually-entered data may be entered at the end of a day by
`maintenance crews performing the aircraft’s daily li