Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Changes to 1900 maintenance

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Rottweiller

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
429
WASHINGTON, Oct 10 (Reuters) - Regulators on Friday ordered maintenance changes for the Beech 1900 turboprop, a popular aircraft for regional airlines that has been involved in two crashes this year that killed 23 people.

The Federal Aviation Administration required that operators of Beech models 1900, 1900C and 1900D twin-engine aircraft manufactured by Raytheon Aircraft Co. RTN.N correct maintenance manual information on the plane's elevator system. Elevators are panels on the horizontal section of the tail that help control aircraft pitch.

The FAA said an illustration accompanying written instructions on elevator system repairs shows a key part installed backward. If the text alone were followed, the part would be installed properly.

Regulators are also requiring an additional visual inspection each time certain elevator work is performed.

"An incorrectly installed elevator trim system component, if not detected and corrected, could result in difficulties in controlling the airplane or a total loss of pitch control," regulators said in their order.

The FAA requirements take effect Oct. 15 and stem from the August crash of a Colgan Air flight in Nantucket Sound off Massachusetts that killed the pilot and co-pilot. There were no other people aboard the plane, which was headed to another airport to pick up passengers.

While the FAA order could be an indicator of what caused the crash, National Transportation Safety Board investigators will not formally determine that for months.

They already know the crew reported problems controlling the 19-seat aircraft and was attempting an emergency landing when it hit the water. They also know that maintenance crews had replaced some of the aircraft's elevator components the previous day.

Investigators are exploring similarities between the Colgan Air accident and an Air Midwest crash in North Carolina last January that killed 21 people.

The Air Midwest crew also reported problems controlling their aircraft shortly after takeoff and was attempting to land when it crashed.

Investigators in the Air Midwest crash have zeroed-in on maintenance work done on the flight control system in the days before the crash. They also have said the aircraft was too heavy and out of balance.

Fleet-wide checks of elevator controls after that crash turned up no notable flaws.

There are nearly 370 Beech 1900-series planes in the U.S. fleet, with fewer than half flown by regional airlines.

"They've been in service for a very long time and their numbers are reducing," said Deborah McElory, president of the Regional Airline Association. She said they have been reliable, but are being replaced by faster regional jets.
 
Last edited:
I thought this correction was made months ago by means of a manual revision.

Was there a manual revision right after the Air Midwest crash?

Does this mean Colgan did not update their maintenance manuals prior to doing the maintenance on Scott's flight?
 
Does this mean Colgan did not update their maintenance manuals prior to doing the maintenance on Scott's flight?

Do you think that the FAA would issue a change today, if it had already issued the change??
 
I had heard the maintenance PROCEDURE changed after the Air Midwest accident. This article is referring to a change in an incorrect illustration of the same procedure.
 
What I heard was that the procedure was changed after Air Midwest and of course so was the manual. However when they (Raytheon) changed the manual they messed up and somehow put one of the illustrations backwards. So now they are fixing that backwards illustration.
 
chperplt said:
Do you think that the FAA would issue a change today, if it had already issued the change??

???
im sorry did you say "faa issue change"

right

of course they would issue a change any time they want
 
Elevator Trim

Great Lakes had a 1900 attempt to take off out of GRI a few weeks ago on a test flight after coming out of maintenance that had a trim problem. When they got to Vr and attempted to rotate, nothing happened. Apparently when the mechanics did whatever it is that they do to the elevator trim they installed something 180 degrees from the way it was supposed to be installed. When the crew set the trim for takeoff what they thought was neutral elevator trim was actually full nose down elevator trim. The crew aborted the takeoff above V1 without incident.
 
So what was your point, then?
 
Do you think that the FAA would issue a change today, if it had already issued the change??
So what was your point, then?
Look at us all. What could have been conducted in polite collegial fashion is now fvcked into cocked hat.

I don't know...I didn't have any problem following this thread...the article is pretty self explanitory.

The reversed photo or image in the manual...boy is that gonna cost somebody some major cash. It also means that the mechs at colgan have a good chance at NOT being found NEGLIGENT.

It's pretty sad that these pilots had to perish, as the result of a proof reading error (if that is in fact what caused the crash).
 
Last edited:
English


My point is that the FAA did not issue the same change twice. They issued one change after the first accident, then this is a second change.

My comment was in regard to your comment about our maintenance manuals not being updated, and your insinuation that the accident occured because of this.
 
I did not make a comment that the maintenance manual was not updated. I asked a question to clarify whether the mistake was on the part of Raytheon or the person updating the manuals at Colgan.

I know there are alot of heighened tensions between the Colgan pilots and family members. Everyone is a little sensitive about the whole subject. I'll try to be more tactful when asking questions. Scott was a friend and I just want to know why he died.

Please reread my post without the defensive posture.
 
no worries, I'm sorry if I offended
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top