According to my search:

  • Almost 12% of all aircraft accident reports cite a maintenance factor. source
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ What is the actual problem you're trying to solve? $\endgroup$ – Dan Hulme Oct 24 '15 at 22:39
  • $\begingroup$ i want to create a solution to automate the process if that is needed $\endgroup$ – geo Ema Oct 24 '15 at 23:07
  • $\begingroup$ I have the feeling that you are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. As it is currently stated, your post assumes a problem: The visual pre-flight inspection (walk-around) is not accurate. It also suggests an improvement: Remove inaccuracies by automation. And your question is: Is this automation possible? To answer, it is necessary to understand what inaccuracies you are trying to remove (if possible provide examples of incidents that did occur). Could you consider editing your post to add this required information? $\endgroup$ – mins Oct 26 '15 at 7:59
  • $\begingroup$ If the question can be re-worded, I think it could be discussed. I find it interesting from the point of view that a machine carries out the maintenance rather than a human. $\endgroup$ – Firee Nov 16 '15 at 10:14

1) An automated test will only test the things it is designed for. A visual inspection is an opportunity for a pilot to spot unexpected problems or problems not covered elsewhere.

2) 'it is not accurate' - define 'accurate', and explain how you come to this conclusion.

  • $\begingroup$ 1)i mean something like an robot or UAV scan the plane 2) the human error $\endgroup$ – geo Ema Oct 24 '15 at 23:41
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @geoEma - "the human error" does not define accurate and does not explain how you came to that conclusion. $\endgroup$ – Steve V. Oct 25 '15 at 2:29

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.