Narrative:

Aircraft came into ZZZ with a service check and some assigned work attached to the package. The book was clean and the flight crew reported no problems with the aircraft. I began my service check walkaround ground visual of the aircraft and when I got to the left/H fwd fuselage area I noticed numerous lighting strikes on the skin starting from the nose radome working aft past the wing-to-body fairing. Upon further inspection I found the left/H fwd alternate static port had 3 ea lighting strikes which had welded the surface of the static port. The track of the strike is pretty obvious (in my opinion) starting from the radome working aft. In my experience; this was a pretty good strike and I had not even been up to the aft fuselage or the tail yet to look for the exit point. I initiated log page for the lightning strikes and log page for the conditional inspection due. I also initiated log page for the alternate static port damage. What was puzzling was the clean book with no pilot report from the flight crew. I assume with this much damage the flight crew would definitely know if they had been hit by lightning. I ran a 3-DAY history and discovered that aircraft was stuck by lighting and reported the previous day. A conditional inspection was performed by contract maintenance with no defects noted and the aircraft returned to service. It then flew for the better part of two days before the service check here in ZZZ where it was caught. The aircraft was towed to hangar line in the morning and they have since found a melted static wick on top of the v-stab and apparently it is now scheduled out of service for the next 3 days to repair the damage found. I've initiated this report to find out how this aircraft could operate in service with this much damage for almost two days and not be found; as well as the initial conditional inspection.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter states the service check required a walkaround visual inspection of the overall aircraft. Starting at the left side of the fuselage from the radome aft; he noted numerous big brown and black spots on the fuselage paint and on closer inspection; it was discovered it was lighting strike burns. The paint was gone from many of the strikes and the fuselage skin surface was wavy and wrinkled. The left alternate static port had 3 strikes and fused the port to the fuselage skin. The airplane was taken out of service and in the hangar; with good lighting; it was found the fuselage had 38 skin strikes that required burnishing or repair. The static port required replacement and was rvsm critical. The topmost critical stabilizer static discharge wick was melted and needed skin repair and replacement. The airplane had a reported lighting strike the day prior to the damage discovery and had flown 17 flights after a conditional lighting strike inspection; which was signed off by a contract technician with 'no effects noted and aircraft returned to service.'

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TECHNICIAN; DURING A SVC CHK; DISCOVERED EXTENSIVE LIGHTING STRIKE DAMAGE. THE LOGBOOK WAS CLEAN. HE CHKED ACFT HISTORY; FOUND LIGHTING STRIKE RPTED THE DAY BEFORE. CONTRACT TECHNICIAN SIGNED OFF CONDITION LIGHTING STRIKE INSPECTION PERFORMED; 'NO DEFECTS NOTED RETURNED TO SVC.'

Narrative: ACFT CAME INTO ZZZ WITH A SVC CHK AND SOME ASSIGNED WORK ATTACHED TO THE PACKAGE. THE BOOK WAS CLEAN AND THE FLT CREW RPTED NO PROBS WITH THE ACFT. I BEGAN MY SVC CHK WALKAROUND GND VISUAL OF THE ACFT AND WHEN I GOT TO THE L/H FWD FUSELAGE AREA I NOTICED NUMEROUS LIGHTING STRIKES ON THE SKIN STARTING FROM THE NOSE RADOME WORKING AFT PAST THE WING-TO-BODY FAIRING. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION I FOUND THE L/H FWD ALTERNATE STATIC PORT HAD 3 EA LIGHTING STRIKES WHICH HAD WELDED THE SURFACE OF THE STATIC PORT. THE TRACK OF THE STRIKE IS PRETTY OBVIOUS (IN MY OPINION) STARTING FROM THE RADOME WORKING AFT. IN MY EXPERIENCE; THIS WAS A PRETTY GOOD STRIKE AND I HAD NOT EVEN BEEN UP TO THE AFT FUSELAGE OR THE TAIL YET TO LOOK FOR THE EXIT POINT. I INITIATED LOG PAGE FOR THE LIGHTNING STRIKES AND LOG PAGE FOR THE CONDITIONAL INSPECTION DUE. I ALSO INITIATED LOG PAGE FOR THE ALTERNATE STATIC PORT DAMAGE. WHAT WAS PUZZLING WAS THE CLEAN BOOK WITH NO PLT RPT FROM THE FLT CREW. I ASSUME WITH THIS MUCH DAMAGE THE FLT CREW WOULD DEFINITELY KNOW IF THEY HAD BEEN HIT BY LIGHTNING. I RAN A 3-DAY HISTORY AND DISCOVERED THAT ACFT WAS STUCK BY LIGHTING AND REPORTED THE PREVIOUS DAY. A CONDITIONAL INSPECTION WAS PERFORMED BY CONTRACT MAINT WITH NO DEFECTS NOTED AND THE ACFT RETURNED TO SVC. IT THEN FLEW FOR THE BETTER PART OF TWO DAYS BEFORE THE SVC CHK HERE IN ZZZ WHERE IT WAS CAUGHT. THE ACFT WAS TOWED TO HANGAR LINE IN THE MORNING AND THEY HAVE SINCE FOUND A MELTED STATIC WICK ON TOP OF THE V-STAB AND APPARENTLY IT IS NOW SCHEDULED OUT OF SVC FOR THE NEXT 3 DAYS TO REPAIR THE DAMAGE FOUND. I'VE INITIATED THIS RPT TO FIND OUT HOW THIS ACFT COULD OPERATE IN SVC WITH THIS MUCH DAMAGE FOR ALMOST TWO DAYS AND NOT BE FOUND; AS WELL AS THE INITIAL CONDITIONAL INSPECTION.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATES THE SVC CHK REQUIRED A WALKAROUND VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE OVERALL ACFT. STARTING AT THE LEFT SIDE OF THE FUSELAGE FROM THE RADOME AFT; HE NOTED NUMEROUS BIG BROWN AND BLACK SPOTS ON THE FUSELAGE PAINT AND ON CLOSER INSPECTION; IT WAS DISCOVERED IT WAS LIGHTING STRIKE BURNS. THE PAINT WAS GONE FROM MANY OF THE STRIKES AND THE FUSELAGE SKIN SURFACE WAS WAVY AND WRINKLED. THE LEFT ALTERNATE STATIC PORT HAD 3 STRIKES AND FUSED THE PORT TO THE FUSELAGE SKIN. THE AIRPLANE WAS TAKEN OUT OF SVC AND IN THE HANGAR; WITH GOOD LIGHTING; IT WAS FOUND THE FUSELAGE HAD 38 SKIN STRIKES THAT REQUIRED BURNISHING OR REPAIR. THE STATIC PORT REQUIRED REPLACEMENT AND WAS RVSM CRITICAL. THE TOPMOST CRITICAL STABILIZER STATIC DISCHARGE WICK WAS MELTED AND NEEDED SKIN REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT. THE AIRPLANE HAD A RPTED LIGHTING STRIKE THE DAY PRIOR TO THE DAMAGE DISCOVERY AND HAD FLOWN 17 FLIGHTS AFTER A CONDITIONAL LIGHTING STRIKE INSPECTION; WHICH WAS SIGNED OFF BY A CONTRACT TECHNICIAN WITH 'NO EFFECTS NOTED AND ACFT RETURNED TO SVC.'

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.