Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Director of Maintenance Sentenced to House Arrest for Obstructing NTSB and FAA Aircraft Accident Investigation
Summary
David Esteves was working as a maintenance director at Avantair, located at St; Petersburg Clearwater International Airport in Clearwater, Florida. On July 22, 2012, the pilot reported An Avantair aircraft that the left Elevator of the aircraft is not working properly and missing. After pilot reporting, the aircraft landed in San Diego and again departed for Henderson without the Left Elevator’s maintenance. Federal Investigation Administration (FAA) and National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) initiated this negligence investigation.
But Esteves ordered his mechanic to remove the parts of the right Elevator to tamper with the condition of the right Elevator and power up the aircraft. He wanted to erase the data of the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR). This was a criminal act, and he tried to obstruct the investigation of NTSB and FAA. He sentenced to 8 months’ house arrest and a $2000 fine by the U.S. District court Florida on June 23, 2017. The court also imposed a 36 months’ probation (Howard, 2017).
Problem
The problem was the attempt to disrupt the FAA and NTSB investigation regarding the aircraft incident investigation of P180 Avantair by powering up the aircraft to erase the CVR data and remove the right Elevator.
Source of problem
The source or reason for the problem was a Piaggio P.180 aircraft incident. The aircraft was investigated by the FAA, and NTSB and David Esteves tried to disrupt the investigation by altering the aircraft’s conditions and tempering the data.
Significance of the Problem
Aircraft under investigation due to any incident is supposed to be under the custody of the FAA. The airline management and maintenance staff are required to support the investigation and do not perform any maintenance and replacement of parts. This could alter the evidence and will be unfair for the fair investigation. So the importance of this problem is deniable because it is the case of an intentional criminal act and could affect the investigation results. The Avantair was operating the aircraft in unsafe conditions. Operating aircraft with unsafe conditions and without line maintenance is restricted by the FAA, and the operator could face serious charges.
Is the company or one individual at fault?
In this case, it is not identical either it was company policy or not. But as David Esteves was working as the director of maintenance and responsible for managing the maintenance tasks and in the court only Esteves proved guilty and sentenced to prison, so it was Esteves’s individual act. He did that to save his position at Avantair.
Is the problem a common one investigated in maintenance activities?
The misconduct done by the Esteves is not a common problem within maintenance organizations. Usually, the maintenance directors are responsible and professionally deal with such situations, ensuring that such incidents never happened in their organization.
Alternative Actions
The problem was with David Esteves. He did that on purpose to save his reputation, position at the airline, tried to save himself from FAA legal action. The possible solution to this problem is that Esteves should have to face the legal investigation and cooperate with the FAA and NTSB to determine the reasons and responsible person for that misconduct and serious negligence. By following these steps, Esteves could have saved himself from such serious allegations and presentment.
Does it appear the company culture allowed or overlooked the misconduct?
Yes, it seems like the company culture and maintenance management system was not working properly. There was no system to inspect the aircraft after landing, and without a line, maintenance aircraft was sent for another location. Several questions need to be answered by the company like Why the aircraft took off without maintenance, why the pilot didn’t inspect the aircraft prior to take-off, why the company doesn’t have line maintenance facilities and if they do have then why the proper procedure was ignored. So Esteves did that due to the lack of the company’s Safety Management System (SMS).
Safety Management System (SMS) can be the second option to avoid such incidents. This system’s effectiveness is established, and most of the airline and maintenance organizations are using this system. SMS is a structured and systematic approach to conduct and monitor the operations and procedures of an organization. This system’s advantage is that everyone will perform his duties according to the standard rules, and there will be no maintenance risk and errors due to the human factor. The only disadvantage of this approach is cost. It could be costly for small operators and low-cost airlines (Stolzer, Halford & Goglia, 2015).
Was the flying public endangered by the actions? Why or why not?
Yes, the passenger’s lives were at stake when Avantair operated the aircraft in unsafe conditions and without proper aircraft maintenance. This could lead the aircraft to a fatal accident, and passengers may have lost their lives.
Recommendations
I think this problem couldn’t have happened if Esteves follows the proper procedures. As a maintenance director, he was responsible for the proper maintenance of the left Elevator of the aircraft before the next take-off. I strongly recommend that Avantair improve its maintenance procedure and maintenance facilities, either in-house maintenance or outsourced maintenance tasks. If they don’t have the budget to maintain and establish the maintenance hangars and equipment, they should seriously think about outsourcing the maintenance. They should revise their maintenance procedures and checklists. Each maintenance performed should be a recorder with proper maintenance records.
References
Howard, R. (2017). Director of Maintenance sentenced to house arrest for obstructing NTSB and FAA aircraft accident investigation. Retrieved from https://www.oig.dot.gov/library-item/35804
Stolzer, A. J., Halford, M. C. D., & Goglia, M. J. J. (2015). Safety management systems in aviation. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!