Custom Search
|
|
|
||
 11460
EICO/vrd
01 NOV 02
From: Commander, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Engineering Innovation and Criteria
Office (EICO)
To:
Distribution
Subj: INTERIM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (ITG 2003-01) AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE
FACILITY DESIGN
Ref:
(a) MIL-HDBK 1028/1C, "Aircraft Maintenance Facilities", 1 Apr 99
Encl: (1) Recommended Criteria Improvements, "Aircraft Maintenance Facilities", dtd 26 Oct 02
1. Purpose. The purpose of this guidance is to provide basic criteria and information for the design of
aircraft maintenance hangars.
2. Background. Reference (a) provides criteria for aircraft maintenance facilities that is mission
oriented. Type I hangars house carrier based aircraft, and Type II hangars house the larger cargo and
marine patrol aircraft.
3. Discussion. The criteria program is dedicated to providing designs that reflect user functional
requirements as well as flexibility in future mission requirements. Recently, NAVFAC has utilized the
design/build strategy with best value source selection for hangars to capture innovative design
practices and realize maximum economy. It is evident that the hangar roof framing system drives the
entire hangar design more than any other feature. The cantilever roof structural and the header truss
system are the two primary roof-framing systems used for the hangar maintenance bay. The cantilever
roof structural design has historically proven to be more difficult to design and construct as reflected
by the cost comparison between the two systems documented in enclosure (1). Reference (a) endorses
the cantilever roof system to allow future hangar expansion along the flight line. Where flight line
expansion is real estate constrained or base water distribution limited for fire suppression, criteria has
allowed for alternate roof designs with sufficient justification and endorsement by the major claimant.
However, the Navy has rarely exercised the option to add on to an existing hangar that is framed by the
cantilever system.
4. Criteria. Designers shall use the following guidance for aircraft maintenance facilities:
Select Hangar roof-framing design based on an economic comparison of the cantilever system versus
the header truss system unless directed otherwise by the regional engineer. Potential for flight
expansion and base utility infrastructure capacity for hangar fire protection expansion shall also be
considered.
Subj: INTERIM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (ITG) AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE FACILITY
|
 
|
|
|
||
