Spare parts secure identification and tracking

[AWG]

Hi everybody:

I am representing a company that is specialized in proposing a series of
customized solutions for the fight against counterfeiting and for protection
of Intellectual Property, thanks to several security tecnologies that might
be stand-alone or embedded in other products for friendly use. The keys for
secure identification are visible and invisible security technologies which
need special devices to be positively identified.
While one of the first logical application of such technologies seems to be
the fashion-related world, I would like to propose these products to the
aerospace industry which is in these years more and more concerned by
not-OEM spare parts that eventually build a parallel market the airlines are
sometimes not aware to feed.
If you were to propose such ideas and concepts, which key-manager or
airframe maker department would you ask for an apointment?
In a few words, is there any particular position in the airplane
manufacturers world that i specially taking care of this?
I thank you in advance for your suggestion or direct experience.

Regards

Andrea
Milan, ITALY

[Jim Macklin]

The FAA has had the procedure in place for many years.
Criminals can sell bogus parts now and any system you can
invent can also be ignored by criminals who will use it to
sell their bad parts, citing your certification.

109 results for bogus parts out of at least 6,015 (
Details )


These sources have been queried:
a.. Federal Forms - No result retrieved in 0.138s, 50
requested. (1 page requested - 1 OK)
b.. FirstGov FAQs - No result retrieved in 0.141s, 20
requested. (1 page requested - 1 OK)
c.. My Money - No result retrieved in 0.133s, 200
requested. (1 page requested - 1 OK)
d.. Podcasts - No result retrieved in 0.145s, 20
requested. (1 page requested - 1 OK)
e.. Web Results - Top 100 results retrieved out of 6,015
in 1.026s, 100 requested. (2 pages requested - 2 OK)
f.. Web Results - Top 9 results retrieved out of 9 in
0.213s, 10 requested. (1 page requested - 1 OK)
v 1.7
1.. Federal Aviation Administration - faasafety.gov -
Flight Safety ... [new window][preview][close preview]

It is common to refer to unapproved parts as "bogus parts",
and a bogus part in the minds of most people correlates to
counterfeit parts. It is accurate to say that counterfeit
parts are ...
www.faasafety.gov/hottopics.aspx?id=21- Cached -More from
this site
2..
3..
4.. NTSB - Advisory [new window][preview][close preview]

Bogus" Parts Case in Italy. According to widely reported
news media accounts, earlier this year authorities
discovered a cache of replacement parts for Airbus aircraft
in Italy that might have ...
www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2002/020225.htm- Cached -More from
National Transportation Safety Board
5..



"AWG" > wrote in message
...
| Hi everybody:
|
| I am representing a company that is specialized in
proposing a series of
| customized solutions for the fight against counterfeiting
and for protection
| of Intellectual Property, thanks to several security
tecnologies that might
| be stand-alone or embedded in other products for friendly
use. The keys for
| secure identification are visible and invisible security
technologies which
| need special devices to be positively identified.
| While one of the first logical application of such
technologies seems to be
| the fashion-related world, I would like to propose these
products to the
| aerospace industry which is in these years more and more
concerned by
| not-OEM spare parts that eventually build a parallel
market the airlines are
| sometimes not aware to feed.
| If you were to propose such ideas and concepts, which
key-manager or
| airframe maker department would you ask for an apointment?
| In a few words, is there any particular position in the
airplane
| manufacturers world that i specially taking care of this?
| I thank you in advance for your suggestion or direct
experience.
|
| Regards
|
| Andrea
| Milan, ITALY
|
|

[Aluckyguess]

"Built and sold spare parts my whole life. Anyone can phony up a part. The
deal is it just doesnt happen very often. The parts are tracable right back
to the manufacture down to every sub that performed an operation. If someone
sold a faulty part they would get caught. When an aerospace company buys
parts all certs are required.

[Emily]

Aluckyguess wrote:
> "Built and sold spare parts my whole life. Anyone can phony up a part. The
> deal is it just doesnt happen very often. The parts are tracable right back
> to the manufacture down to every sub that performed an operation. If someone
> sold a faulty part they would get caught. When an aerospace company buys
> parts all certs are required.
>
>
Not true at all - you might want to check into what the ASA says about
this. You might also want to check into what the FAA says about
"building" spare parts.

You seem to be confusing serviceability with traceability. The fact is,
anyone can buy and sell anything without paperwork as long as they do
not represent it at serviceable material. Industry standard does
require trace to the last regulated source that owned the part, but
there is no law saying it must be provided.

In addition, industry standard certainly does not require trace to the
manufacturer for most aircraft parts. The exceptions are life limited
engine parts, which ARE generally required to be traced to the
manufacturer. Maintenance documents for the life of the part are also
not required, even for the above mentioned life limited parts.

Disclaimer - The above refers to commercial industry standards, not FAA
requirements or GA spare parts.

[Emily]

AWG wrote:

>I would like to propose these products to the
> aerospace industry which is in these years more and more concerned by
> not-OEM spare parts that eventually build a parallel market the airlines are
> sometimes not aware to feed.

Well, actually, the airlines ARE aware of the market in non-OEM parts.
Some airlines even <gasp> buy PMA parts to install on their aircraft.
It's not as much of an issue as you seem to think it is. There is
nothing illegal or unethical about non-OEM parts in the spares marketplace.

PMA does not equal counterfeiting.

I wonder what you think of Pratt & Whitney's decision to manufacture
CFM56 parts.....

[Aluckyguess]

"Emily" > wrote in message
...
> Aluckyguess wrote:
>> "Built and sold spare parts my whole life. Anyone can phony up a part.
>> The deal is it just doesn't happen very often. The parts are traceable
>> right back to the manufacture down to every sub that performed an
>> operation. If someone sold a faulty part they would get caught. When an
>> aerospace company buys parts all certs are required.
> Not true at all - you might want to check into what the ASA says about
> this. You might also want to check into what the FAA says about
> "building" spare parts.
>
> You seem to be confusing serviceability with traceability. The fact is,
> anyone can buy and sell anything without paperwork as long as they do not
> represent it at serviceable material. Industry standard does require
> trace to the last regulated source that owned the part, but there is no
> law saying it must be provided.
>
Then an AP would have to install the part or a FAA approved station. Again
what AP or FAA approved work station would install this part. This is what
insures the part was built to spec. Again part is traceable.

> In addition, industry standard certainly does not require trace to the
> manufacturer for most aircraft parts.
Your wrong. Show me one part not traceable.
The exceptions are life limited
> engine parts, which ARE generally required to be traced to the
> manufacturer. Maintenance documents for the life of the part are also not
> required, even for the above mentioned life limited parts.
The amount of years has changed different companies require different
lengths of time.
>
> Disclaimer - The above refers to commercial industry standards, not FAA
> requirements or GA spare parts.

[Emily]

Aluckyguess wrote:
<snip>
>>
> Then an AP would have to install the part or a FAA approved station. Again
> what AP or FAA approved work station would install this part. This is what
> insures the part was built to spec. Again part is traceable.

You're wrong. I don't know what else to say. Aircraft parts do not
have to be traced to the manufacturer.

>> In addition, industry standard certainly does not require trace to the
>> manufacturer for most aircraft parts.
> Your wrong. Show me one part not traceable.

I can show you at least twenty engine part that I dealt with today.
Industry standard does NOT require trace to the manufacturer. Industry
standard ONLY requires trace to the manufacturer for life limited engine
and airframe parts. Please check with ASA, because you are dead wrong
on this.

I'm very curious as to what company you work for. First, you claim to
manufacturer spare aircraft parts - under what authority do you do this?
Second, I work with most major parts distributors and brokers and do
not have any customers who require that spare parts be traced to a
manufacturer. I also work with most every major airline in the world
and they do not require spare parts to be traced to the manufacturer.
You, sir, are full of it.

[Aluckyguess]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..
> Aluckyguess wrote:
> <snip>
>>>
>> Then an AP would have to install the part or a FAA approved station.
>> Again what AP or FAA approved work station would install this part. This
>> is what insures the part was built to spec. Again part is traceable.
>
> You're wrong. I don't know what else to say. Aircraft parts do not have
> to be traced to the manufacturer.
Every part we manufactured over the last 30 years commercial and military
where part marked with a manufacture number and a part number with rev.
I don't know what else to say.
>
>>> In addition, industry standard certainly does not require trace to the
>>> manufacturer for most aircraft parts.
>> Your wrong. Show me one part not traceable.
>
> I can show you at least twenty engine part that I dealt with today.
> Industry standard does NOT require trace to the manufacturer. Industry
> standard ONLY requires trace to the manufacturer for life limited engine
> and airframe parts. Please check with ASA, because you are dead wrong on
> this.
>
> I'm very curious as to what company you work for. First, you claim to
> manufacturer spare aircraft parts - under what authority do you do this?
> Second, I work with most major parts distributors and brokers and do not
> have any customers who require that spare parts be traced to a
> manufacturer. I also work with most every major airline in the world and
> they do not require spare parts to be traced to the manufacturer. You,
> sir, are full of it.

[Emily]

Aluckyguess wrote:
> "Emily" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> Aluckyguess wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> Then an AP would have to install the part or a FAA approved station.
>>> Again what AP or FAA approved work station would install this part. This
>>> is what insures the part was built to spec. Again part is traceable.
>> You're wrong. I don't know what else to say. Aircraft parts do not have
>> to be traced to the manufacturer.
> Every part we manufactured over the last 30 years commercial and military
> where part marked with a manufacture number and a part number with rev.
> I don't know what else to say.

Part number marked on a part does not necessarily mean the part is
traced to the manufacturer. It has to be backed up with documentation.