NTSB Also Looking Closely At Weight/Balance

Was it poor maintenance? Was there a problem with overloading or shifting luggage? Three and a half months after US Airways Express Flight 5481 slammed into a hangar on take-off at Charlotte/Douglas International Airport in Charlotte (NC), the NTSB continues plodding through its investigation, methodically searching for answers to those questions and more.

5481 plowed into parking lot and a maintenance hangar just seconds after takeoff Jan. 8 from Charlotte/Douglas. The NTSB is now looking at the plane's weight with shifting baggage and problems with a horizontal tail surface as possible contributing factors in the mishap. All 21 people on board the Beech 1900 were killed when the aircraft impacted the ground.

Who's Job Was This Anyway?

But the demise of 5481 has brought up questions about what some observers call the uncommon contract maintenance arrangement that Air Midwest, which flew the plane for US Airways, had for the Beech 1900 turboprop.

The NTSB will "most certainly" look at the maintenance arrangement in its crash investigation, the Charlotte Observer reported Sunday, citing a source familiar with the investigation.

The NTSB said the flight control cables on the commuter aircraft were improperly adjusted two days before the crash during work performed at a hangar in Huntington (WV).

Air Midwest contracted with Raytheon Aerospace LLC to maintain its planes. In turn, Raytheon contracted with Structural, Modification and Repair Technicians Inc. of Edgewater, Fla., to provide staff. The shop had been open for six months and employed about a dozen people at the time of the tragedy.

The Blame Game: Musical Chairs

The management structure is unusual because the FAA allowed the hangar to operate under Air Midwest's operating certificate, but other companies provided all but one of the workers.

Federal regulations say Air Midwest was responsible for maintenance. It's unclear how closely Air Midwest monitored the maintenance work performed by the other companies.

Air Midwest, Raytheon and the Florida company have repeatedly declined to comment on issues related to the investigation.

A key question is whether the sequence of events that preceded the crash would have happened at a more traditional airline maintenance hangar, where the airline's permanent mechanics have their work overseen by a safety inspector who has few additional responsibilities.

The mechanic who adjusted the flight-control cables on the turboprop was working on a Beech 1900 for the very first time, the Observer reported. He expected an inspection by his supervisor, who were both hired through the Florida company. Whether the inspection ever occurred is part of the investigation.

Is It Safe To Farm Out Such Work?

The FAA should require that airlines retain the role of inspector when they contract out for maintenance, said Jim Burnett, NTSB chairman from 1982 to 1988.

"The FAA should say it's the responsibility of the airline, and not allow them to delegate that to anyone," Burnett said.

Third-party maintenance companies now do about half of all maintenance work for airlines in this country. In 2001, major carriers spent $2.9 billion for outsourced aircraft maintenance - $1.3 billion more than they spent five years before, according to the DoT IG. The inspector general's office is now examining the FAA's oversight of third party repair stations.

Why Contract?

Sending aircraft maintenance work out of house allows airlines to sidestep costly union contracts. Some airline experts say it has become tougher for airlines to ensure the quality of maintenance work when the mechanics are so far removed from the corporate structure of the airline itself.

"The more removed you get from the maintenance, the more training it takes," says Sarah MacLeod, executive director of the Aeronautical Repair Station Association, a group that represents repair shops.

FMI: www.ntsb.gov