700,
Just eyeballing FAA AGC Quarterly reports, from what I have seen so far, USAIR has had more maintenance violations thrown against them than all the 3rd party facicilties in the USA.
I am going to have fun putting this list together to PROVE to YOU that YOUR #### STINKS JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSES!
It is just to bad that they only put maintenance or QC down and don't really get down to the nitty gritty of what YOU GUYS F'D UP! Here are a few good ones tough.
US Airways Settles Civil Penalty Case for $75,000
The Federal Aviation Administration has accepted $75,000 from US Airways Inc. to settle a case in which the FAA had alleged that the air carrier had operated a Boeing 737 aircraft in an un-airworthy condition.
In that case, FAA alleged that US Airways had failed to properly classify damage uncovered during a scheduled maintenance check, a condition that required a major repair before the aircraft could be returned to revenue service. US Airways operated the aircraft on approximately 247 flights between February 24 and April 18, 2000.
During the maintenance check, which was done at the carrier's maintenance facility in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a puncture was found in the left-hand elevator upper surface. To prevent such re-occurrences, US Airways has revamped its engineering assessment procedures. US Airways will now review all such assessments to ensure they meet the carrier's maintenance standards and procedures. This announcement is made in accordance with the FAA's practice of releasing information to the public on enforcement actions involving penalties of $50,000 or greater.
FAA Proposes Civil Penalty of $245,000 Against US Airways, Inc.
The Federal Aviation Administration has proposed to impose a $245,000 civil penalty against US Airways, Inc., for allegedly failing to inspect and maintain six Pratt and Whitney PW4000 engines on three Airbus Industrie A330 aircraft in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations and the air carrier's FAA-approved operations specifications.
FAA alleges that as a result of failing to comply with its continuous airworthiness maintenance program and limitations contained in its operations specifications. US Airways operated the three, A330 aircraft on hundreds of passenger-carrying revenue flights, between June and September 2000 while they were not in compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations.
US Airways' maintenance program and operations specifications require that a periodic borescope inspection be done on turbojet engines either at 600 cycles or 2,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. FAA alleges that the air carrier failed to do those internal engine inspections at the required time.
US Airways has implemented a procedure to ensure that the actual number of engine cycles on aircraft used for training flights is recorded in the airline's maintenance computer system. US Airways is also developing ways to automate this procedure.
Operations specifications outline how an individual carrier complies with FAA regulations. They are tailored to meet the unique needs of the individual operator.
US Airways had 30 days from receipt of the proposed civil penalty letter, which was mailed March 12, to respond to the allegations. US Airways requested an informal conference to discuss the proposed civil penalty. That meeting is scheduled in early July.
This announcement is made in accordance with the FAA's practice of releasing information to the public on newly issued enforcement actions involving civil penalties equal to or greater than $50,000.
