FAA Can't Prove It Inspected USAirways Maintenance Contractor | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-12.08.25

AirborneNextGen-
12.09.25

Airborne-Unlimited-12.10.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-12.11.25

AirborneUnlimited-12.12.25

AFE 2025 LIVE MOSAIC Town Hall (Archived): www.airborne-live.net

Tue, May 13, 2003

FAA Can't Prove It Inspected USAirways Maintenance Contractor

Inspector Says He Was There Before Flight 5481 Crashed

It's an embarrassing situation - one that could have career implications for a particular FAA inspector. Jerry Unruh was supposed to have inspected a maintenance provider subcontracted for the airline by Raytheon. Unruh was supposed to have inspected the subcontractor in Huntington (WV) twice before US Airways Express Flight 5481 crashed upon take-off at Charlotte-Douglas Airport Jan. 8. He was supposed to have inspected the West Virginia facility at least once after that. But FAA documents obtained by The Charlotte Observer indicate otherwise.

Re-entered Records

Unruh told The Observer he remembers traveling from his home base in Wichita (KS) to Structureal Modification And Repair Technicians before the Huntington facility started taking sub-contractor work from Raytheon. But when The Charlotte Observer asked the FAA for records of the visits prior to the Jan. 8 crash, administration officials couldn't produce them.

Instead, the paper reports, Unruh apparently went back into the FAA computer and entered information from the inspections on May 2 - after he had been interviewed by reporters. When asked about pre-dating that inspection report, Unruh refused comment.

Two days after Flight 5481 crashed, killing all 21 on board, FAA inspectors did make a documented visit to the SMART plant. There, a mechanic who worked on the Beech 1900 told them he remembered adjusting the commuter's control cables, but expected his supervisor to check the work before the aircraft was sent back into service. That supervisor check was apparently never made. The last flight of the Beech 1900 was its first fully-loaded flight since the cables had been adjusted.

Now, the NTSB is focused on those very control cables, as the board conducts a public hearing on the Charlotte crash May 20. Board members will also hear from expert witnesses who believe the load on board 5481 exceeded the Beech 1900's 17,120 gross maximum.

FMI: www.ntsb.gov/aviation/aviation.htm

Advertisement

More News

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (12.09.25)

“We respectfully call on the City of Mesa to: 1. Withdraw the landing fee proposal immediately 2. Engage with the aviation community before making decisions that impact safet>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (12.09.25): High Speed Taxiway

High Speed Taxiway A long radius taxiway designed and provided with lighting or marking to define the path of aircraft, traveling at high speed (up to 60 knots), from the runway ce>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (12.09.25)

Aero Linx: International Federation of Airworthiness (IFA) IFA uniquely combines together all those with responsibility for policies, principles and practices concerned with the co>[...]

NTSB Final Report: Diamond Aircraft Ind Inc DA20C1 (A1); Robinson Helicopter R44

Controller’s Expectation That VW02 Would Have Departed Sooner Led To An Inadequate Scan And Loss Of Situational Awareness Analysis: A Robinson R-44 helicopter N744AF, VW02 (V>[...]

ANN FAQ: Q&A 101

A Few Questions AND Answers To Help You Get MORE Out of ANN! 1) I forgot my password. How do I find it? 1) Easy... click here and give us your e-mail address--we'll send it to you >[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC