Engine and airframe maintenance company BizJet International has completed a 50,000-pound thrust engine test cell at its Tulsa, Oklahoma headquarters. The 13,000-square foot test cell was designed by Aero Systems Engineering and will be used to run new-generation Honeywell engines as well as Rolls-Royce Speys and Tays, for which BizJet recently received service facility authorization.

The new test cell and expenses associated with launching the Rolls-Royce overhaul and maintenance program cost $25 million. BizJet's plans include providing nose to tail service for all types of corporate jets, and the new test cell is large enough to allow the company to expand into new engine markets.

Incorrect Rigging and W & B Lead to Air Midwest Crash

Maintenance was the primary focus of the National Transportation Safety Board conclusions, probable cause, and recommendations resulting from the Air Midwest Flight 5481 accident at a public hearing in Washington, D. C. The hearing, held February 27, 2004, came just over a year after the accident occurred in Charlotte, North Carolina, in which a Raytheon (Beechcraft) 1900D crashed just after takeoff. All on board, two crew and 19 passengers, were killed. The NTSB stated the probable cause of the accident was "the airplane's loss of pitch control during takeoff…resulting from the incorrect rigging of the elevator control system compounded by the airplane's center of gravity, which was substantially aft of the certified aft limit."

The NTSB determined that the airplane's elevator control system was incorrectly rigged during the detail six (D6) maintenance check and that the rigging restricted the airplane's elevator control to 7 degrees airplane nose down, about one half of the downward travel specified. Exacerbating the restricted elevator control was the excessive aft center of gravity. Although the flight crew calculated the weight and balance correctly using the methods, charts, and weights approved, the actual weight of the aircraft was approximately 600 pounds heavier, and the CG was about 5.5 percent further aft than permitted.

Other conclusions offered by the NTSB included:

• The quality assurance (QA) inspector did not provide adequate on-the-job training (OJT) and supervision to the mechanic who rigged the airplane;
• Both the QA inspector and the mechanic skipped required steps that would have helped detect the misrig;
• The independent nature of the required inspection item (RII) task was compromised by the inspector providing OJT to the mechanic rigging the airplane, then inspecting it;
• No functional check was done at the end of the maintenance since none was required.

One critical maintenance error highlighted at the hearing was that the NTSB investigators believe that the D6 mechanics installed the forward rig pin incorrectly. In tests conducted to try to duplicate the misrigging, investigators were able to do so by installing the forward rig pin so that it did not go through the hole in the forward elevator bellcrank but instead sat on the side of the bellcrank. This may have occurred, the NTSB said, because the mechanics did not remove floorboards as specified in the maintenance manual in order to visually confirm proper installation of the rig pin.

During the hearing, Board vice-chairman Mark Rosenker questioned the NTSB's Steve Carbone, maintenance records group chairman. "Would you call the maintenance sloppy?" When Carbone deferred, Rosenker offered, "I'll call it sloppy."

Of the 21 recommendations made to the FAA by the Safety Board, 14 were directly related to maintenance. The recommendation that may have the furthest-reaching effect on the industry is to "require that all 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 121 air carrier maintenance-training programs be approved." This language, if implemented by the FAA, would mean that the training programs for mechanics would be more in line with other safety-of-flight critical groups in the industry such as pilots and flight attendants.

TSA: Coming to Repair Station Near You?

Under a tight deadline and on short notice, the Transportation Security Administration called a public meeting to glean ideas from the public on foreign and domestic repair station security. The meeting was held in Arlington, Virginia on Friday, February 27, 2004, in response to the Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. Section 611 of the act requires the TSA to "issue final regulations to ensure the security of foreign and domestic aircraft repair stations"� by August 8, 2004. There are 650 foreign and 4,500 domestic repair stations to audit by the August deadline.

The meeting was presided over by Pam Hamilton, director of aviation initiatives. There were representatives from general aviation, business aviation, trade associations, and unions in attendance.

Bob Robeson of the Aerospace Industries Association was first to speak. He stated a concern about the ability of the TSA to meet the deadline. "It will be a huge effort to review 600 foreign repair stations," he said. "Where will you find the workforce to carry the audits out?" Many who spoke echoed this sentiment. He also asked that an appeal process be incorporated into whatever program is put into place. Christian Klein of the Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA) stated that members of ARSA would be directly impacted by the outcome of the TSA's actions and he was "concerned about creating a greater problem with new and unnecessary legislation."

Many who spoke expressed concern that the information that they might share would be in and of itself a security risk. A request was made that sensitive information should be discussed in private and not included on the public postings. Michael Mertens, chief inspector—aircraft safety with Duncan Aviation, stated that "this is not just a repair station issue," but all businesses on the airport should be subject to scrutiny. Several trade unions were in attendance including the AFL-CIO, Transport Workers Union, and International Association of Machinists.� Their concerns included a perceived double standard for foreign repair stations, areas of the world where bribery is an accepted tradition, and lack of background checks required for foreign mechanics.

The meeting was concluded with the announcement that a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would be submitted after the consideration of the comments posed at the meeting and those that were to be submitted by the March 29 deadline.