1 Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10 th , 2010 Jackson Square Aviation Presented By: Shannon Ackert Vice President, Capital Markets November 10 th , 2010 Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development Maintenance Topics Conference Maintenance Topics Conference
36
Embed
elements of aircraft maintenance reserve development · Source : Boeing 3.0 – Maintenance Reserve Escalation Jackson Square Aviation 6 Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Jackson Square Aviation is a global commercial aircraft lessor headquartered in San Francisco, California
2Jackson Square Aviation
Current satellite offices : London, Seattle, Miami & Buenos Aires. Opening Asia office in 2010.
The company has a $500 million commitment from Oaktree Capital, which has financed the management team since the mid 1990’s with a high degree of success.
Jackson Square Aviation is focused on acquiring – primarily through Sale & Leaseback (SLB) :
Narrowbody & widebody Passenger & freighter
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
I. Annual Escalation Policies – Varies By Lessor, But Typically:1. Fixed (i.e. 3%)2. Indexed to Core Producer Price (CPI) Index3. Computed Using OEM escalation formula – weighted using labor &
material Indices (ECI – Labor & PPI ‐Material)
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
I. Airframe Heavy Structural Inspection Costs Factors
I. Airframe Age (First, Mature, & Ageing Runs)• Costs are escalated to account for
airframe ageing, which results in higher non‐routine tasks.
• General “non‐routine” factorescalations: 10% ‐ 15% per phase.
II. Flight Cycles• Cost may be increased to
account for high cycle operation.Routine
NonRoutine
Newness< 6 Years
Maturity6 – 15 Yrs
Aging> 15 Years
NonRoutine
NonRoutine
Routine Routine
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
7Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
I. Airframe Heavy Structural Inspection Costs Factors ‐ continued
III. Scope of Work Not driven by the aircraft operation, instead Policy established by Lessor Generally Falls Under Two Structures:
Structure A ‐ Scope of work includes reimbursement for material and routine & non‐routine labor for systems, structural & zonal tasks.
Structure B ‐ Scope of work includes reimbursement for material and routine & non‐routine labor for structural & zonal tasks.
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
8Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
I. Airframe Heavy Structural Inspection Interval Factors
Two Types of Calendar Interval Structures:
Structure A : Calendar interval based off the OEM generic and/orsample block program.
• Example Generic Block : A320 / A330 Family : 4C/6Yr & 8C/12Yr Structural Inspection Checks @ 6 & 12 Yr Intervals,
• Example Sample Block : 737NG Family : @ 8 Yr Intervals
Structure B : Calendar interval based on timing of majority of zonal /structural tasks. Reflective of a customized maintenance program.
• Example : 737NG Family – 8, 10, & 12 Year Intervals• Example : 747‐8 Family – 8 Year Intervals
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
9Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
I. Airframe Heavy Structural Inspection Example : A330‐300 HSI Costs
Scope of work assumption: includes routine & non‐routine labor for systems, structural & zonal tasks, and material.
A. First‐Run Phase ‐ New ‐ 6 Yr• 4C/6Yr SI Cost : $1.75M• 8C/6Yr SI Cost : $1.50M
B. Mature‐Run Phase ‐ 6 Yr ‐ 12 Yr• 4C/6Yr SI Cost : $2.01M• 8C/6Yr SI Cost : $1.50M
C. Ageing‐Run Phase ‐ > 12 Yr• 4C/6Yr SI Cost : $2.20M• 8C/6Yr SI Cost : $1.65M
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
10Jackson Square Aviation
4C/6YR Check Escalated15% off First‐Run Costs
Both 4C/6YR & 8C/12YR ChecksEscalated 10% off Mature‐Run Costs
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
Scenario 2 ‐ Annual FC = 2,250 FCCyclic limiter = 8 Yr (18,000/2,250)TOW Limiter = 8 Yr = 96 MoMo Rate: (320,000/ 96) = $ 3,333
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve DevelopmentIII. Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) Restoration Cost Factors• Material driven – 70% ‐ 80% of cost is material,• Minor variance between first & mature‐run costs.• Scope of work : Rework of the power section, load impeller & gearbox
modules according to OEM’s performance restoration and full gas path overhaul criteria.
Time On‐Wing Factors• If new generation APU :
Use of empirical Mean‐Time Between Unscheduled Removal (MTBUR) from similar in‐production APU model.
• If mature APU : OEM Published Mean‐Time Between Unscheduled Removal
(MTBUR) Metrics.
13Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
Mean‐Time
Betw
een Re
movals
5,945 FH ‐ MTBUR5,495 FH ‐ MTBR
6,450 FH ‐ MTBCR12‐Mo Rolling Averages
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve DevelopmentIII. Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) Restoration Time On‐Wing Factors – OEM MTBUR Metrics
I. Engine Thrust Rating ‐ Increasing Thrust > Higher EGT Deterioration > Lower Time On‐Wing
18Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve DevelopmentIV. Engine Performance Restoration Time On‐Wing Factors ‐ continued
II. Engine Flight Leg
19Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Cruise
1 FH
Cruise
3 FH
Flight Profile = 1.0 Flight Hour per Flight Cycle
Flight Profile = 3.0 Flight Hours per Flight Cycle
1 FH 1 FH
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
Flight Leg (Hours)
Cos
t $ /
FH
Greater Flight Leg
LowerDMC
Increasing Flight Leg
Lowers EGTDeterioration
Higher Time On-Wing
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve DevelopmentIV. Engine Performance Restoration Time On‐Wing Factors ‐ continued
II. Engine Flight Leg
Increasing Flight Leg
Lowers EGT Deterioration
Greater Flight LegLowerDMCCo
st $ / FH
Flight Leg (Hours)
Higher Time On‐Wingand Lower Cost $ / FH
20Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve DevelopmentIV. Engine Performance Restoration Time On‐Wing Factors ‐ continued
II. Engine Flight Leg – 777 Average Utilization
21Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
Model Series Utilization Fl Leg777 200 8.4 2.50777 200ER 11.6 5.90777 200LR 12.9 9.00777 300 9.3 2.70777 300ER 13.2 7.30
Source : Boeing Cumulative Statistics
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0Flight Leg (Hours)
0%10%20%
Increasing Derate = Lower Thrust
1.5 2.5 3.5
Cos
t $ /
FH
Increasing Derate
Lowers Thrust &EGT Deterioration
Higher Time On-Wing
Increasing Derate
Lowers Thrust andEGT Deterioration
Higher Time On‐Wingand Lower Cost $ / FH
Cost $ / FH
Flight Leg (Hours)
5% Derate10% Derate
Increasing Derate = Lower Thrust
15% Derate
IV. Engine Performance Restoration Time On‐Wing Factors ‐ continued
III. Engine Derate
22Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve DevelopmentIV. Engine Performance Restoration Time On‐Wing Factors ‐ continued
IV. Environment ‐ Engines operated in dusty, sandy and/or erosive‐corrosive environments are exposed to higher blade distress and thus greater performance deterioration.
Notes:• Lessors are now adjusting their reserve rates to account for
region of operation. • Generally applies to narrow‐body aircraft operating within
distressed environments.
23Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
LowestMedium / LowMediumHighHighest
Colors highlight severityand rate of occurrence ofdistress
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
24Jackson Square Aviation
IV. Engine Performance Restoration Time On‐Wing Factors ‐ continued
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Engine ‐ Environmental Distress Chart
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
1.010% DerateSe
verity Factor
2.2
1.7
Flight Leg
$72$122$158 $70 $6815% Matrix =
5% Derate
15% Derate
$80$136$176 $78 $76
5% Matrix =
10% Matrix =
Base Flight Leg (2.0)Base Rate = $80 / FH
$88$150$194 $86 $84
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
25Jackson Square Aviation
IV. Engine Performance Restoration Example – Severity Curve
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
26
IV. Engine Performance Restoration Example – CFM56‐7B26 Restoration Calculation
Base Operation : 2.0 Flight Leg / 10% Derate / Temperate RegionBase Rate : $80 / FH
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve DevelopmentV. Engine Life Limited Parts (LLP) Replacement Cost Factors
• OEM piece part escalation – currently averaging over 5% per year.
• Inclusion of Static LLPs ‐ Although these parts are not classified to be critical they do fall under the category of parts whose failure could create a hazard to the aircraft i.e. shrouds and frames.
27Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
28
V. Engine Life Limited Parts (LLP) Replacement Piece Part Life‐Limit Factors
Life limits tend to range between 15,000 – 30,000 flight cycles, however LLPs can have shorter lives imposed on them by airworthiness
directives (ADs). Lessor imposed stub factor on life limits – typically: 10% for narrowbody engines 5% for widebody engines
Some manufacturers certify ultimate lives of LLPs at the time they certify an engine model. Other manufacturers certify the lives as experience is accumulated. In these scenarios, ultimate lives are reached after one or several life extensions.
Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
4.0 – Maintenance Reserve Development
29
V. Engine Life Limited Parts (LLP) Replacement Stack Cost
Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Many lessors base their costs to be reflective of costs negotiated from either a U.S. or European based MRO facility.
Consequently, their reserves rates are normally ranked as “market‐based to above market‐based”.Ultimately, reserves are heavily negotiated and are often “marketing” driven.
30Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
Appendix A – Sources of Maintenance Reserve Metrics1. Maintenance Reserve Claims – Example Performance Restoration
31Jackson Square Aviation
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010
Appendix A – Sources of Maintenance Reserve Metrics
Elements of Aircraft Maintenance Reserve Development
2. OEM Conferences & Publications
32Jackson Square Aviation
3. Commercial Publications
Boeing Maintenance Topics Conference, Miami, Fl November 10th, 2010