Handling the landing gear challenge

In a Q&A session, Atkins’ senior engineer, James Domone discusses the company’s involvement in providing conceptual, analytical and design engineering services to some of the world’s leading landing gear OEMs.

Atkins has assisted the aerospace sector for over three decades, using rapid advances in technology and an understanding of materials to increase speed to market, maximise time in the sky and generate value through efficiencies.

In addition to Atkins landing gear in-service support and modifications, the company’s portfolio includes the certification support of air-to-air refuelling systems, design and certification activities for electric aircraft projects and conducting military airworthiness reviews for the defence sector.

Q) What are the current design challenges that face landing gear manufacturers and how do you counter operational hazards, such as foreign object damage and corrosion?

Whilst the need for lightweight design is ever present, design for reliability and maintainability are very important as these aspects directly support operator cost reduction.

Robust and detailed design activity for safe operation – this is all pretty standard and mandatory as required by aerospace certification authorities. Details of how this is done tends to be proprietary information held by the aircraft OEMs and landing gear manufacturers.

Q) How do you combine all the systems involved in landing gear and how do you approach the design, and how do your systems tie in with the final assembly of the aircraft?

Through the application of well-established systems engineering practices. The different OEMs and landing gear manufacturers all have their own variation of doing this, but all include requirements management and validation, and verification activity. This is all then supported, as required by the airworthiness authorities, by suitable testing building up from component level through sub-system and full system level testing before being tested once installed on the aircraft. This testing is mandated by the airworthiness authorities with details of how this is done tending to be proprietary information held by the aircraft OEMs.

Q) What developments do you see happening in the design of landing gear systems and can composite materials replace such a safety critical part of the aircraft?

I can definitely see potential for composite parts in landing gear. However, there are significant manufacturing challenges involved with this. Current landing gear designs feature large lug and pin connections between components, which are very difficult to produce in composite materials. There’s also the challenge of dealing with debris and impact on landing gear, including from ground crew, which would require increased accuracy in-situ composite inspection techniques to understand any damage that may be present below the surface.

Q) What are your thoughts on Industry 4.0 and the factory of the future?

I think the upsides of Industry 4.0 are clear, however, are they worth the large initial investment necessary? For existing product lines, the benefit is unlikely to outweigh this cost, but for newer product lines there could be a stronger case. With internet connecting manufacturing tools scrappage can be reduced with real-time automated monitoring of tool wear and component measurements and digital twins can be automatically created ready to support through-life digital asset management.

Recently Airbus announced that it is considering a hydrogen powered aircraft, which could present such an opportunity. There are also next-generation fighter aircraft programmes starting to ramp up, such as Tempest in the UK, which could provide a similar opportunity. Another catalyst is likely to be the push for carbon net zero activity. Industry 4.0 technology presents opportunities for waste reduction and improved energy efficiency, particular if it is combined with circular economy ideas and approaches.

Q) Have you been able to use this pandemic-enforced downtime to effectively ‘reset’ and look at how efficiently you are running the business?

It definitely doesn’t feel like downtime within Atkins, with many areas of our business as busy, or more so, than pre-pandemic. We have had an IT infrastructure and work practices which already supported remote working, most clearly obvious in our working practices between our European and Indian offices, which often included integrated teams working together.

Many manufacturing companies have taken the opportunity to upgrade facilities and review processes to ensure they are ready for a likely short-term reduced output requirement for civil aerospace, but also to scale as future demand changes. Another big consideration is the wider sustainability and carbon net zero targets that are becoming a more clearly defined requirement globally, with legislative, investor and customer pressure to adapt.

Q) Are there any positives in general to come out of all this?

At Atkins, we’ve been demonstrating for a number of years that we can deliver remotely to our clients. The pandemic has shown to other clients that not only is this approach possible - and that they can access the best of the supply chain by looking beyond their immediate vicinity - but there are also benefits for their own staff by working more flexibly. This can all result in reduced travel demands over a longer period, which helps with the behavioural and culture shifts we all need to adopt to support carbon net zero targets.

Q) What kind of industry landscape will we be faced with when we get back to the new normal?

I believe it will be a blended approach, where many individuals will likely work in an office for two or three days a week and work remotely the other days. The in-office days will be concentrated on collaborative activity and meetings, allowing more focused activity when at home. Conversely, there will be those who don’t have suitable work from home environments and they will most likely want to return to working in an office full-time after having to make do with temporary set-ups on kitchen tables which need to be cleared away every day, or working at small desks squeezed into bedroom corners. Businesses need to be aware of this mix of needs of staff when planning future office capacity and layout.

In the wider industrial context, with Industry 4.0 connected technologies we will likely start to see increasing automation, initially with robots and cobots. This could extend to factories being monitored remotely, potentially even completely remotely operated with robots used to complete any repair or unexpected activity. With reduced need to consider the health and safety aspects of having people working alongside machines output could be increased as more could be fitted in the same factory space.

Pulling back further, the socio-economic marketplace will likely move through a turbulent period post-Covid as high-income countries switch focus to global sustainability and carbon net-zero targets, with a short-term suppressed demand for commercial aerospace. Lower-income countries will see the greatest growth as their populations increase their wealth and demand access to global markets.

Q) What are your thoughts on the fact that we are currently unable to hold tradeshows and are ‘virtual’ ones the way forward?

I like the idea of providing virtual attendance options for all future tradeshows – in particular conferences or the presenting elements at tradeshows. These formats massively lend themselves to this approach and increase their reach and accessibility, particularly to those unable to travel for a variety of reasons. Where in-person tradeshows still have value is the opportunity to see hardware and components and also to browse and see something you didn’t expect or start conversations with people you’ve never met previously or old colleagues.

www.atkinsglobal.com