Incident: Soot Build-Up Issue on Gulfstream G500 and G600 Jets

Published Date: 2022-11-29

Postmortem Analysis
Timeline unknown
System unknown
Responsible Organization 1. Gulfstream Aerospace - Gulfstream Aerospace was responsible for causing the software failure incident related to soot build-up on the G500 and G600 jets due to the way a small engine vents gas in flight [135356].
Impacted Organization 1. Owners of Gulfstream G500 and G600 jets [135356]
Software Causes unknown
Non-software Causes 1. The presence of soot at the rear of some Gulfstream G500 and G600 jets was possibly due to the way a small engine vents gas in flight, leading to soot build-up on the inside of the aircraft skin and frame near the auxiliary power unit (APU) [135356].
Impacts unknown
Preventions 1. Implementing thorough software testing procedures during the development phase to detect any potential issues related to the engine venting gas and soot buildup [135356].
Fixes 1. Gulfstream Aerospace has notified owners of its G500 and G600 jets and the Federal Aviation Administration that it has discovered soot at the rear of some of those business jets, possibly because of the way a small engine vents gas in flight. Gulfstream mentioned that it would have a plan for a fix ready early next year after testing [135356].
References unknown

Software Taxonomy of Faults

Category Option Rationale
Recurring unknown The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to either one_organization or multiple_organization.
Phase (Design/Operation) design Unknown
Boundary (Internal/External) within_system The software failure incident related to the soot build-up issue on Gulfstream G500 and G600 jets is primarily within_system. The issue was related to the way a small engine vents gas in flight, leading to soot build-up on the inside of the aircraft skin and frame near the auxiliary power unit (APU) [135356]. The company is working on a fix for the problem, indicating that the contributing factors originate from within the system itself.
Nature (Human/Non-human) non-human_actions (a) The software failure incident in this case is not related to non-human actions but rather to a physical issue with the aircraft's auxiliary power unit (APU) causing soot build-up on the inside of the aircraft skin and frame near the APU [135356]. (b) The failure in this incident is not attributed to human actions but rather to a design or operational issue with the APU venting gas in flight, leading to soot build-up on the aircraft components [135356].
Dimension (Hardware/Software) hardware (a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware: - The article mentions that Gulfstream Aerospace discovered soot at the rear of some G500 and G600 jets, possibly due to the way a small engine vents gas in flight [Article 135356]. - Gulfstream found soot build-up on the inside of the aircraft skin and frame near the auxiliary power unit (APU), a small engine at the tail of the plane [Article 135356]. - The presence of soot was not necessarily indicative of an overheat condition, but in some cases, planes would need to have structural components replaced due to "no allowance for localized overheating" [Article 135356]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to software: - The article does not mention any software-related issues contributing to the soot build-up on the aircraft.
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) non-malicious (a) The articles do not mention any malicious intent or actions related to the software failure incident reported in the news article [135356]. (b) The software failure incident related to soot build-up on the inside of the aircraft skin and frame near the auxiliary power unit (APU) of Gulfstream G500 and G600 jets is categorized as non-malicious. The issue was attributed to the way a small engine vents gas in flight, leading to soot deposits. Gulfstream stated that the presence of soot was not necessarily indicative of an overheat condition, and they were working on a fix for the issue, which was not considered a safety-of-flight issue by both Gulfstream and the Federal Aviation Administration [135356].
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) unknown The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to poor decisions or accidental decisions. Therefore, the intent of the software failure incident in this case is unknown.
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) unknown Unknown
Duration unknown The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to the Gulfstream G500 and G600 jets. Therefore, the duration of the software failure incident, whether permanent or temporary, is unknown in this case.
Behaviour other (a) crash: The articles do not mention any software crash incident related to the Gulfstream G500 and G600 jets. [135356] (b) omission: There is no indication of a software omission leading to the reported issue with soot build-up on the Gulfstream jets. [135356] (c) timing: The issue with soot build-up on the Gulfstream jets does not seem to be related to timing issues in software performance. [135356] (d) value: The reported problem with soot build-up on the Gulfstream jets does not suggest a failure in the software performing its intended functions incorrectly. [135356] (e) byzantine: The behavior of the software failure incident does not align with a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. [135356] (f) other: The reported issue with soot build-up on the Gulfstream jets seems to be related to the way a small engine vents gas in flight, potentially leading to soot deposits. This behavior does not fit into the categories of crash, omission, timing, or value, but rather seems to be a physical issue related to the aircraft's operation. [135356]

IoT System Layer

Layer Option Rationale
Perception None None
Communication None None
Application None None

Other Details

Category Option Rationale
Consequence no_consequence The articles do not mention any consequences related to death, harm, basic needs, property loss, or delays caused by the software failure incident. The incident described in the articles is related to soot build-up on the inside of Gulfstream G500 and G600 jets near the auxiliary power unit (APU) due to the way a small engine vents gas in flight. The consequence discussed in the articles is more related to potential maintenance and repairs needed on the affected aircraft rather than direct human or non-human impacts. Therefore, the most relevant options based on the information provided are: (g) no_consequence: There were no real observed consequences of the software failure (h) theoretical_consequence: There were potential consequences discussed of the software failure that did not occur The articles focus on Gulfstream Aerospace notifying owners of the issue, working on a fix, and collaborating with the FAA to address the soot build-up problem, indicating that the issue is being managed proactively without any reported direct negative consequences.
Domain transportation The software failure incident reported in the news article [135356] is related to the transportation industry. Specifically, the incident involves General Dynamics Corp's Gulfstream Aerospace notifying owners of its G500 and G600 jets about the discovery of soot at the rear of some of those business jets, possibly due to the way a small engine vents gas in flight. This issue was not considered a safety risk by both the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Gulfstream, but it required a plan for a fix to be ready early next year after testing. Gulfstream mentioned that the soot build-up was found on the inside of the aircraft skin and the frame near the auxiliary power unit (APU) at the tail of the plane, which is a component related to the transportation industry. Additionally, the article mentions that Gulfstream is the market leader in the large-cabin jet segment, competing against rivals like Bombardier and Dassault. The incident did not lead to any anticipated restrictions on the use of the APU, which is crucial for functions like starting power for the main engines, further emphasizing the transportation industry's relevance in this software failure incident.

Sources

Back to List