NTSB Report on Alaska Flight 261 | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-05.20.24

Airborne-Unlimited-05.28.24

Airborne-FlightTraining-05.29.24 Airborne-Unlimited-05.30.24

Airborne-Unlimited-05.24.24

Tue, Dec 10, 2002

NTSB Report on Alaska Flight 261

Not Enough Grease on Jackscrew

Putting to rest voluminous outside speculation about the cause of the crash of Alaska Airlines Flight 261, the NTSB is expected today to say what's been the popular explanation for nearly three years: not enough grease on the jackscrew caused the failure, which caused loss of control of the aircraft, and the deaths of all 88 aboard.

The flight, from Puerta Vallarta to San Francisco, went down January 30, 2000, off Point Mugu (CA).

Nearly immediately, as the wreckage was recovered (bottom photo), investigators turned to the horizontal stabilizer's jackscrew (right). When it was recovered along with its mating gymbal nut, it showed high friction and stripping, indicative of binding, which is indicative of insufficient lubrication.

Later, the issue of inspection came up, and many heads were put on the block. An inspection of the jackscrew called for replacement of the expensive assembly; four subsequent inspections showed the screw assembly to be in-tolerance, though just barely.

Further sleuthing revealed there had been two types of grease applied, at different times, to that jackscrew.

Both were approved greases; but there was a question of the compatibility of the greases -- could they work with each other, if mixed -- and the verdict was that they could not. Was the removal of the old grease thorough enough, to preclude any incompatibility? Would such incompatibility be sufficient to cause the wear and binding that brought the airliner down?

The NTSB's final report should put ANN's "Story of the Year 2000" to bed, and hopefully, to rest. From here, it's up to the lawyers to keep things so 'profitably' stirred up...

FMI: www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X20339&key=1

Advertisement

More News

ANN FAQ: Contributing To Aero-TV

How To Get A Story On Aero-TV News/Feature Programming How do I submit a story idea or lead to Aero-TV? If you would like to submit a story idea or lead, please contact Jim Campbel>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (05.29.24)

Aero Linx: International Association of Professional Gyroplane Training (IAPGT) We are an Association of people who fly, build or regulate Gyroplanes, who have a dream of a single >[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.29.24): NORDO (No Radio)

NORDO (No Radio) Aircraft that cannot or do not communicate by radio when radio communication is required are referred to as “NORDO.”>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.30.24): Beyond Visual Line Of Sight (BVLOS)

Beyond Visual Line Of Sight (BVLOS) The operation of a UAS beyond the visual capability of the flight crew members (i.e., remote pilot in command [RPIC], the person manipulating th>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (05.30.24)

Aero Linx: Malibu M-Class Owners and Pilots Association (MMOPA) The Piper M-Class Owners & Pilots Association (PMOPA) is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the interest>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC