Airline Pilot Central Forums - 10th Anniversary of Alaska Flight 261

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)

- - 10th Anniversary of Alaska Flight 261 (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/47724-10th-anniversary-alaska-flight-261-a.html)

10th Anniversary of Alaska Flight 261

It's difficult to believe 10 years has gone by, but the memories are still so fresh and the pain is still so raw. I hope Alaska learned from this tragedy.

Quote:

From Seattle Times:

Those who lost loved ones when Alaska Airlines Flight 261 plunged into the Pacific Ocean off California have learned some hard, bitter truths in the 10 years since the crash.

They've learned that time doesn't heal all wounds, that some injustices and wrongs can never be righted. They've learned that there are human vultures and con artists who prey on grief and tragedy.

Some have found peace and acceptance, but others still burn with anger. Some say the silver linings and deeper meanings of God's plans remain mysteries to them. Many believe love does transcend death in the end.
And most have learned to live with a broken heart.

Local News | 10th anniversary of Alaska Flight 261 | Seattle Times Newspaper

I heard that the jackscrew was made in China

Hey Vagabond,

Do you know if it was true that the jackscrew that failed was made in China and that they had problems with defective Chinese jackscrews before? I understand that people will buy TV's from a country with a solid history of cheapness over quality, but how about cars and those new aircraft that they are working on...

I'll stick with the good old Boeing or MD versus a new Chinese airliner, thanks anyway, China, until the value of human life in the Eastern World matches that of the West.

Take care,

B727DRVR:cool:

This accident has nothing to do with Chinese jackscrews.

Probably should let this topic rest.

Some lessons are learned the hard way, as was this one.

I was working ATC radar at Burbank (SoCal Approach) when this aircraft went from east to west, between LAX and BUR, descending over the shoreline from about FL220 squawking 7700.

I thought it was some squid returning to Pt. Mugu Naval Air Station. The next month, Southwest ran off runway 8 at BUR.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vagabond (Post 753604)

It's difficult to believe 10 years has gone by, but the memories are still so fresh and the pain is still so raw. I hope Alaska learned from this tragedy.

What lessons?

It wasn't just Alaska or one airline. The airline was following accepted and approved procedures. The FAA approved of the procedures. The jack screw was WITHIN tolerances although they were at limits. The OEM approved of the procedure. Other problems including confusion over which lubricant was and was not approved and once the lubricant can was loaded in a gun, you had no way of verifying which one it was. Over the years the inspections of the jackscrew had gone from a few hundred hours to nearly 3000 hrs.

The point is the data and incident records showed there was nothing wrong with the way things were.. much like the Shuttle launches wherein they launched outside the first window so often it gave rise to the term 'normalizing deviance' (see Diane Vaughan and Sidney Dekker).

All this to say it was a sad day. And as one hufacts wizard noted, "The amazing thing is how the evolution of an accident is so opaque while it is occuring and so obvious afterwards."

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyWilliams (Post 753931)

I was working ATC radar at Burbank...

I was flying into SFO that night. Found out what happened after we blocked in. Had to walk past the Alaska gates to get to our van. Very sobering.

High school buddies dad flew that plane and wrote up a trim problem in the weeks prior to the accident. Still remember taxiing into SEA with rampers crying. Lots of non-revs on that flight. Since I'm on a maddog I still think about this accident with almost every trim warning. RIP

Quote:

Originally Posted by III Corps (Post 754065)

[/i]

What lessons?

It wasn't just Alaska or one airline. The airline was following accepted and approved procedures. The FAA approved of the procedures. The jack screw was WITHIN tolerances although they were at limits. The OEM approved of the procedure. Other problems including confusion over which lubricant was and was not approved and once the lubricant can was loaded in a gun, you had no way of verifying which one it was. Over the years the inspections of the jackscrew had gone from a few hundred hours to nearly 3000 hrs.

The point is the data and incident records showed there was nothing wrong with the way things were.. much like the Shuttle launches wherein they launched outside the first window so often it gave rise to the term 'normalizing deviance' (see Diane Vaughan and Sidney Dekker).

All this to say it was a sad day. And as one hufacts wizard noted, "The amazing thing is how the evolution of an accident is so opaque while it is occuring and so obvious afterwards."

Probable Cause from NTSB findings:

A loss of airplane pitch control resulting from the in-flight failure of the horizontal stabilizer trim system jackscrew assembly's acme nut threads. The thread failure was caused by excessive wear resulting from Alaska Airlines' insufficient lubrication of the jackscrew assembly. Contributing to the accident were Alaska Airlines' extended lubrication interval and the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) approval of that extension, which increased the likelihood that a missed or inadequate lubrication would result in excessive wear of the acme nut threads, and Alaska Airlines' extended end play check interval and the FAA's approval of that extension, which allowed the excessive wear of the acme nut threads to progress to failure without the opportunity for detection. Also contributing to the accident was the absence on the McDonnell Douglas MD-80 of a fail-safe mechanism to prevent the catastrophic effects of total acme nut thread loss.

What I read in this, and my recollection of the events 10 years ago that the carrier and the FAA were "Frick and Frack."

All the FAA ever does is set minimum standards for air carrier operations. It has always been all carriers' responsibility to rise above FAA minimum standards.

And the point of this thread? Resetting of a popped circuit breaker, poor maintenance by Alaska, poor oversight by the FAA, and what has happened in the past 10 years? Still poor maintenance practices by airlines and poor oversight by the FAA.

Isn’t this like a rerun of a bad movie?

Let’s move on to something new.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IluvRNP (Post 754358)

It has always been all carriers' responsibility to rise above FAA minimum standards.

Where is that written?