Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing · Kansas

MAX Aerostructures

Wichita, KS · ~64 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
6.1
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

MAX Aerostructures runs at 185% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

MAX Aerostructures: 6.1 TCR = 185% of Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

MAX Aerostructures safety composite

MAX Aerostructures scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 80% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 8%), blended into one 0-100 breakdown against same-industry peers. A missing measure drops out and redistributes its weight rather than deflating the score. This is a per-dimension breakdown, distinct from the single letter grade above it (which weights TCR alone against the BLS industry benchmark).

D

44/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 6.12 per 100 workers

Safer than 8% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 80% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% of industry peers

Benchmarked live against every credibly-rated employer in the same NAICS industry code in the current OSHA extract (a segment must have at least 8 rated peers to benchmark). Not a legal or compliance determination; PlainSafetyScore's own weighting (TCR 40%, DART 35%, fatalities 25%).

TCR Δ

−14.1

2017→2021

MAX Aerostructures injury rate improved

MAX Aerostructures's TCR fell 14.1 from 15.9 in 2017 to 1.8 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2017 at 15.9 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=15.9 · 2018=4.8 · 2019=2.5 · 2020=5.6 · 2021=1.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336413 · Wichita, KS ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 6.1 · 185% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #30/32
  • PHOTO Lockheed Martin Corp…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 12 inj
  • SIZE ~64 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Lockheed Martin Corporation US MS Meridian (1507) (0.0 TCR gap)

Read with this employer → · Industry book → · Kansas employers → · Look up another →

MAX Aerostructures in the TCR neighbourhood

Average Total Case Rate among this establishment and nearest same-industry peers

TCR

What this shows MAX Aerostructures averages 6.1 TCR (185% of the Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

Source U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Injury Tracking Application (Form 300A) As of 2026-08-25

MAX Aerostructures TCR series: 2017=15.9 · 2018=4.8 · 2019=2.5 · 2020=5.6 · 2021=1.8 · BLS 3.3

Where MAX Aerostructures falls in its industry

650 Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g. establishments

Safer than 8% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Kansas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #30 safest of 32 Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g. employers in Kansas.

MAX Aerostructures (64 employees, TCR 6.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 30 entities by Average employees (X) and Total Case Rate (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Larger & higher-riskSmaller & higher-riskLarger & saferSmaller & safer than peers 05001,0001,5002,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate MAX Aerostructures
MAX Aerostructures (64 employees, TCR 6.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9

MAX Aerostructures has fewer employees than the Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dus median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. Workforce size and injury rate do not always move together within the same industry -- some of its smaller peers run higher rates than its larger ones, and vice versa.

Year-by-Year Safety Data

Year TCR DART Injuries Illnesses Fatalities
2021 1.8 0.0 1 0 0
2020 5.6 1.9 2 1 0
2019 2.5 2.5 2 0 0
2018 4.8 2.4 2 0 0
2017 15.9 6.3 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336413 · KS · Wichita

650 Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 5,228 rated employers in Kansas with headcount on file · 841 employers in Wichita, KS · 4 cross-state NAT-TCR peers · 4 cross-state NAT-SIZE peers. Closest matches by relationship code are listed below.

Rel Establishment Metric
NAICS-TCR Lockheed Martin Corporation US MS Meridian (1507) 6.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ran Tech - Clackamas 6.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Pioneer Industries 6.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Applied Composites - Indy 6.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE OP KGS DIV GO 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE Excel Constructors, Inc. 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sunflower Wind Project 64 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bettis Contractors, Inc. 64 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spirit Aerosystems 11,775 FTE
CITY-NEAR Textron Aviation - Mid Continent 4,359 FTE
CITY-NEAR Wesley Medical Center 2,657 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1855-KSWIC062 2,438 FTE
NAT-TCR Volkswagen of Duluth 6.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Cotton Growers Cooperative 6.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Carehaven of Pleasants 6.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Leon Valley 6.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Primary Care Ambulance Corp 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hudson Plant 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE MIRAMAR 64 FTE
NAT-SIZE Walker Lumber Company Inc 64 FTE

Rel codes: NAICS-TCR · STATE-SIZE · CITY-NEAR · NAT-TCR/NAT-SIZE cross-state. Read with this employer →

Data Source: OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA), mandatory establishment-level injury/illness reports. Grades compare employer Total Case Rate (TCR) to BLS IIF industry benchmarks. Data covers years reported by this establishment: 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.