Narrative:

We plted the bae J4100 from iad to gso without event. At gso a 2 inch by 2 inch square fiberglass honeycomb area had separated, hinged only by the bottom, from the wing root fairing. Airlines maintenance called contract maintenance to inspect and if able, repair the patch. The repair was made, paper work completed, and the plane re-preflted. We took off and, climbing through about 3000 ft, our flight attendant called saying she heard a noise. The noise stopped momentarily thereafter. After a normal cruise and initial descent we lost communication with dulles approach. A 'rumbling vibration' began and got increasingly worse. The plane was slowed and control kept over it. We somehow got our radios back, declared an emergency and were given priority to land on runway 1L at iad. A no flap landing was made to minimize aerodynamic changes. The landing occurred without incident. It was later found that improper tape was used for the repair. The moral of the story: if your flight attendant hear a buzz, think twice. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter revealed that contract maintenance had contacted the air carrier's maintenance department for instructions on how to repair the 2 inch panel area. The air carrier advised contract maintenance to use a 'high speed metallic tape' for the repair. The contract maintenance man advised the PIC that there were 2 different types of tapes: a high heat and a low heat type. The reporter did not stay around for the actual repair but was present when dispatch assisted the local mechanic in the correct method of filling in the logbook's 'corrective action' column. Of course we now know that the tape did not do the job. Upon arrival at iad the tape was discovered to be the 'duct' type, totally unsuitable for the repair. Reporter was asked if he felt the radio communication problem experienced was part of the aircraft's confign problem. He answered in the affirmative as the temporary loss of communication occurred as the shuddering commenced. The captain was asked what had created this event, ie, was the aircraft damaged prior to this or was there some other kind of failure. He stated that the jetstream 41 has a fairing along the leading edge of the wing, quite close to the fuselage. It is very thin and is designed to 'flex' with the wing. It does this by being able to operate in and out of a groove along the side of the fuselage. When the aircraft was painted, the wrong kind of paint was used which actually 'fused' the fairing to the fuselage. When the wing flexed, the wing fairing was stressed and eventually ruptured in the leading edge area (appears to be a design/production/maintenance problem that needs monitoring).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMER DECLARED AS ACFT DISPLAYED AGGRAVATED SYMPTOMS OF AIRBORNE VIBRATION.

Narrative: WE PLTED THE BAE J4100 FROM IAD TO GSO WITHOUT EVENT. AT GSO A 2 INCH BY 2 INCH SQUARE FIBERGLASS HONEYCOMB AREA HAD SEPARATED, HINGED ONLY BY THE BOTTOM, FROM THE WING ROOT FAIRING. AIRLINES MAINT CALLED CONTRACT MAINT TO INSPECT AND IF ABLE, REPAIR THE PATCH. THE REPAIR WAS MADE, PAPER WORK COMPLETED, AND THE PLANE RE-PREFLTED. WE TOOK OFF AND, CLBING THROUGH ABOUT 3000 FT, OUR FLT ATTENDANT CALLED SAYING SHE HEARD A NOISE. THE NOISE STOPPED MOMENTARILY THEREAFTER. AFTER A NORMAL CRUISE AND INITIAL DSCNT WE LOST COM WITH DULLES APCH. A 'RUMBLING VIBRATION' BEGAN AND GOT INCREASINGLY WORSE. THE PLANE WAS SLOWED AND CTL KEPT OVER IT. WE SOMEHOW GOT OUR RADIOS BACK, DECLARED AN EMER AND WERE GIVEN PRIORITY TO LAND ON RWY 1L AT IAD. A NO FLAP LNDG WAS MADE TO MINIMIZE AERODYNAMIC CHANGES. THE LNDG OCCURRED WITHOUT INCIDENT. IT WAS LATER FOUND THAT IMPROPER TAPE WAS USED FOR THE REPAIR. THE MORAL OF THE STORY: IF YOUR FLT ATTENDANT HEAR A BUZZ, THINK TWICE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR REVEALED THAT CONTRACT MAINT HAD CONTACTED THE ACR'S MAINT DEPT FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REPAIR THE 2 INCH PANEL AREA. THE ACR ADVISED CONTRACT MAINT TO USE A 'HIGH SPD METALLIC TAPE' FOR THE REPAIR. THE CONTRACT MAINT MAN ADVISED THE PIC THAT THERE WERE 2 DIFFERENT TYPES OF TAPES: A HIGH HEAT AND A LOW HEAT TYPE. THE RPTR DID NOT STAY AROUND FOR THE ACTUAL REPAIR BUT WAS PRESENT WHEN DISPATCH ASSISTED THE LCL MECH IN THE CORRECT METHOD OF FILLING IN THE LOGBOOK'S 'CORRECTIVE ACTION' COLUMN. OF COURSE WE NOW KNOW THAT THE TAPE DID NOT DO THE JOB. UPON ARR AT IAD THE TAPE WAS DISCOVERED TO BE THE 'DUCT' TYPE, TOTALLY UNSUITABLE FOR THE REPAIR. RPTR WAS ASKED IF HE FELT THE RADIO COM PROB EXPERIENCED WAS PART OF THE ACFT'S CONFIGN PROB. HE ANSWERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AS THE TEMPORARY LOSS OF COM OCCURRED AS THE SHUDDERING COMMENCED. THE CAPT WAS ASKED WHAT HAD CREATED THIS EVENT, IE, WAS THE ACFT DAMAGED PRIOR TO THIS OR WAS THERE SOME OTHER KIND OF FAILURE. HE STATED THAT THE JETSTREAM 41 HAS A FAIRING ALONG THE LEADING EDGE OF THE WING, QUITE CLOSE TO THE FUSELAGE. IT IS VERY THIN AND IS DESIGNED TO 'FLEX' WITH THE WING. IT DOES THIS BY BEING ABLE TO OPERATE IN AND OUT OF A GROOVE ALONG THE SIDE OF THE FUSELAGE. WHEN THE ACFT WAS PAINTED, THE WRONG KIND OF PAINT WAS USED WHICH ACTUALLY 'FUSED' THE FAIRING TO THE FUSELAGE. WHEN THE WING FLEXED, THE WING FAIRING WAS STRESSED AND EVENTUALLY RUPTURED IN THE LEADING EDGE AREA (APPEARS TO BE A DESIGN/PRODUCTION/MAINT PROB THAT NEEDS MONITORING).

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.