27 Oct Flight 101 was frequent chartered flight to Bimini, Bahamas. After her take off from Miami Seaplane Base, the right wing separated during flight and crashed into a shipping channel adjacent to the Port of Miami, Florida

Can you please paraphrase this?

Flight 101 was frequent chartered flight to Bimini, Bahamas. After her take off from Miami Seaplane Base, the right wing separated during flight and crashed into a shipping channel adjacent to the Port of Miami, Florida. There were no survivors. (National Transportation Safety Board, 2007). There were many instances which indicates that there is a probable structural failure on the wing which the maintenance crews failed to pick up, causing this disaster to happen. According to the Accident Report published by the National Transportation Safety Board (2007), there were 3 maintenance failures: Authority, Organization, Man. The FAA (Federal Aviation Authority) was responsible for overlooking the Chalk’s Ocean Airways safety and maintenance program. However, the FAA failed to identify the inadequacy of the company’s maintenance program results, and also failing to notice multiple cues regarding the safety deficiencies of the company as one of the causes of the incident (National Transportation Safety Board, 2007). The FAA also missed a chance to recertify the model ofthe aircraft (Grumman Mallard G-73T) aircraft with a new certificate which would include a fatigue analysis ofthe aircraft. This fatigue analysis could also have prevented the incident from happening (National Transportation Safety Board, 2007). Chalk’s Ocean Airways is the company which oversees the maintenance procedures for the aircraft model. However, the company had an inadequate maintenance program plan to maintain the structural integrity of the aircraft fleet (National Transportation Safety Board, 2007). The company also failed to identify and properly repair the fatigue cracks, which resulted in the double repair failing to rectify the structural failure at the Z-stringer (National Transportation Safety Board, 2007). The maintenance crew could have picked up on the structural failure after experiencing multiple fuel leaks near the structural damaged wing. They did not probe further to find the cause of the leak but rectified it by replacing the sealant. The maintenance records regarding the doubler repair were also not recorded (National Transportation Safety Board, 2007). The FAA, which was responsible for overseeing the company’s safety and maintenance programs had picked up several instances which indicated the inadequacy of the company should have issued a warning to the company and send directives to conduct an audit to check for discrepancies. Chalk’s Ocean Airways should have consulted the FAA, which is of a higher authority, for advice on the correct procedures on the structural repair of the aircraft. This incident could have been prevented if the employees had undergone MRM (Maintenance Resource Management) courses to realise that the maintenance program of the company had flaws and have consulted the FAA for advice. The maintenance crews should have questioned the repetitive leaks on the same area of the right wing. If an extensive investigation was conducted, they could have found the cause of the leak, which was the structural failure at the Z-stringer and proposed a proper structure repair. This could have prevented the incident from happening. One AD (Airworthiness Directive) which can be implemented is to review the maintenance programs of all commercial aircraft operators. The maintenance programs should have stricter regulation to address recurring discrepancies and further address them should the problem happen again.