Posted on 09/29/2005 8:32:41 AM PDT by holymoly
Three mechanics at Alaska Airlines reported to company officials earlier this year that they found no grease on the jackscrew of an MD-83 jet — the same problem that led to the fatal crash of Alaska Flight 261 nearly six years ago.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), after questions from The Seattle Times, announced yesterday it plans to open a full inquiry into the mechanics' allegations, as well as a second jackscrew incident last week that raised additional questions.
"We will interview all of the people involved," said FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown in Washington, D.C.
Alaska disputed the three mechanics' report that they found no grease on the MD-83 jackscrew, a key mechanism in the tail section that controls the plane's angle of flight. Alaska said the jackscrew had been lubricated during its last previous inspection at a contract repair station in Oklahoma City that does Alaska's major maintenance.
Lubrication of jackscrews on MD-80 series jets has been a critical maintenance item for airlines since the crash of Flight 261 in January 2000. All 88 passengers and crew were killed when the MD-83 plunged into the Pacific Ocean off Southern California, en route from Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, to San Francisco and Seattle.
Shortly after the crash, the FAA issued an emergency directive ordering more frequent lubrications of jackscrews.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) found in 2002 that poor maintenance practices, lack of lubrication and excessive wear led to the catastrophic failure of the jackscrew during Flight 261. It also found the FAA contributed to the crash by allowing Alaska to engage in risky maintenance practices.
The jackscrew is a key component of MD-80 series planes, with no backup system. It is a 2-foot long, 1 ½-inch-diameter threaded shaft that moves up and down through a stationary gimbal nut, raising and lowering the leading edge of the stabilizer, the winglike structure on the tail.
Mechanics write to Alaska Airlines
Statements from three Alaska Airlines mechanics who reported they found no grease on the jackscrew assembly of an MD-83 jet in January.
• Larry Reed's letter • Jeff Shira's letter • Herbert Johnson's letter
Lubrication is to be done every 650 flight hours.
In the incident earlier this year, which occurred Jan. 10 during an overnight check in Seattle, the mechanics reported they found no excessive wear on the jackscrew, nor any indication it was in danger of failing. They applied new grease and returned the plane to service.
But they notified Alaska officials because the jackscrew had been certified as lubricated during a major maintenance check at the Oklahoma City facility, AAR Aircraft Services, on Nov 3.
John Goglia, a former NTSB member who served on the board during the Flight 261 investigation, said the mechanics' written accounts of the incident accurately described the appearance of a jackscrew without grease.
"Wake-up call"
"This report should be a wake-up call for the quality-assurance department of Alaska Airlines that they need to step up the surveillance of their outsourced maintenance," Goglia said.
He said the mechanics took the right step to report their concerns in an industry where small problems are a "short step to big ones."
"Especially that item, because it's caused them so much pain," Goglia said, referring to the mechanics' knowledge about the jackscrew's role in the crash of Flight 261.
"Given what they went through, that's what you would expect and the traveling public should expect," Goglia said.
Alaska spokeswoman Caroline Boren said the airline found no evidence to support the mechanics' claims.
Boren said a mechanic at AAR Aircraft signed a task card stating he lubricated the jackscrew, and that an inspector verified the work. In a written statement provided to Alaska after the January incident, the inspector reiterated that the work had been done, Boren said.
A second report
Last week, one of the Alaska mechanics involved in the January incident reported another "dry" jackscrew, said Boren. Alaska called in an FAA inspector who found the jackscrew had been properly lubricated. She said the finding raised questions about the mechanic's earlier report.
Duane Mauro, safety and standards chairman of Local 14 of the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association in Seattle, the union representing Alaska mechanics, disputed that account.
He said the mechanic initially questioned whether there was enough grease on the jackscrew, then performed a wear check and determined it was sufficiently greased. But the jackscrew was removed and replaced when the mechanic heard a separate "clunking noise" that concerned him.
Mauro said Alaska is trying to discredit the mechanic.
Brown, the FAA spokeswoman, said the agency's inspectors plan to conduct a "complete independent investigation" of the incidents in January and last week, including interviews of Alaska mechanics, AAR mechanics and others.
"We'll be looking at everything," Brown said, including Alaska's maintenance and training programs.
AAR spokesman Chris Mason said, "We completely disagree with any suggestion that work was performed improperly." The company's work on the jackscrew "was performed, inspected and approved in accordance with FAA and manufacturers' approved procedures by FAA-certified technicians and inspectors," he said, adding the agency recognized AAR in June for outstanding training.
AAR is one of two outside repair stations used by Alaska since it began outsourcing all of its major maintenance work late last year to save money. The airline closed down its heavy-maintenance base in Oakland, Calif., cutting several hundred jobs.
Alaska is legally responsible for the outsourced work under federal air-safety regulations and is required to have its own quality-control inspectors on site.
Alaska was unable to determine the precise condition of the jackscrew cited in the Jan. 10 incident because the mechanics had applied new grease so that the plane could be returned to service.
But one of the mechanics mentioned in his statement that he saw a "black residue" on the jackscrew. Boren said that would indicate the "normal condition of a lubricated jackscrew that has been in service."
Union spokesman Mauro said black residue is typically found on a jackscrew without grease. He said the mechanics did not see red-colored Mobil grease 28, the brand used by Alaska, which should have been visible.
"There would be quite a bit of grease on the full length of the jackscrew and service points, and piled up on the nut where it reaches its upper and lower limits," said Mauro, a mechanic for United Airlines.
Alaska would not allow The Times to interview the mechanics, who perform routine maintenance checks and repair problems. The Times obtained copies of their statements, which were submitted to the company in February and March, from someone other than the mechanics.
In one statement, mechanic Larry Reed, who holds the title of inspector, wrote that he found "no evidence of lubricant" on the jackscrew, including the gimbal nut and the upper and lower fittings of the assembly.
"It is my belief based on my experience of previously performing this inspection ... that this jackscrew was not lubed at the last inspection interval on November 3, 2004," Reed wrote.
Mechanic Jeff Shira, who was assigned to lubricate the jackscrew, wrote that the mechanism "seemed to be extremely dry, like it never got lubed" during the November check.
Shira wrote the jackscrew should be "thoroughly coated in Mobil 28 grease."
The third mechanic, Herbert Johnson, wrote that while assisting Shira, he found "no apparent grease on the shaft or above and below the gimbal nut." He stated he found only "black residue" on the shaft.
No political motivation
Mauro said the mechanics' actions were not politically motivated by concerns about outsourcing.
At the time the jackscrew was found to be dry, he said, the mechanics "had no idea who had done the previous service and they wouldn't know."
Goglia, the former safety-board member, said red-colored grease should have been visible on the jackscrew. "Mobil 28 is a grease that lingers," he said. "It has great adhesion properties. When you get in on something, it stays red."
Alaska's claim about the black residue is suspect, said Goglia, a former mechanic who is now a professor of aviation science at Saint Louis University and director of the school's Center for Integrated Emergency Response.
When grease disappears, Goglia said, a black residue from dustlike substances in the air is left behind, he said. "It has no lubrication qualities whatsoever," he said.
The mechanics' union submitted to Alaska photographs it says show black stains on rags used to clean the jackscrew Jan. 10, and red stains on rags used to wipe the properly greased jackscrew of another jet in February.
"The rag convinced me, totally," Goglia said, referring to the black stains.
Old issues
In denying a problem, Goglia said, Alaska is "raising the same issues they put forward during the investigation into Flight 261," when the airline argued that a Boeing-approved grease corroded the jackscrew.
"The NTSB spent considerable effort to show that what Alaska was stating was not true," Goglia said.
In light of the Jan. 10 incident, Goglia said, "The FAA and Alaska Airlines need to increase the surveillance on [AAR] just to make sure this was not a random event."
Boren, Alaska's spokeswoman, said Alaska increased inspections of the jackscrew after the January incident, conducting four checks since then that detected no abnormal wear.
Alaska also changed its procedures to require that mechanics stop work if they determine a jackscrew has not been lubricated, said Brown, the FAA spokeswoman. The jackscrew is then to be preserved for inspection, along with any other materials needed for analysis, she said.
Alaska issued a joint statement last night with the mechanics union and the Air Line Pilots Association, saying neither of the jets involved in the January incident and the one last week left Alaska's maintenance hangar in an unsafe condition.
I don't think I will be flying Alaska any time soon...it is good this is getting public exposure. I have two good friends who are both retired commercial pilots...and they have said that maintenance gets compromised when financial pressures are put on airlines.
Not very reassuring.
Gee. What a surprise.
261 was pencil whipped. They fired the inspector who wouldn't release the aircraft back to service. The FAA was bought. The NTSB doesn't know what the hell and airplane is anyhow.
What a joke. Alaska corporate has turned a blind eye to the wrong doings of the maintenance mgmt for a LONG time.
This wasn't due to financial pressures. The screw gets lubed on A, C, D and K checks. The mechanics are not doing their job. John Liotine should be hailed a hero. He attempted to stop 261 from leaving the hangar. There are corrupt individuals at Alaska. However I would still fly them if I HAD to. If you try to change things, they will make your life hell. It's a good ol boys club and the FAA plays along. The FBI should be looking into 261 and the FAA. However, look who headed the FAA when 261 went down.
Good info -- very interesting.
Corruption costs American lives -- but that is the theme of the Washington government these days...for example, how about ABLE DANGER anyone?
Ah yes, the old 'jack screw'.
I remember one day in Vietnam we taxied out to the runup pad prior to take-off. When the flaps were lowered, the left wing flap came off the jack screw and was left hanging, blowing back and forth in the breeze of the prop wash.
ABORT!!!!
Ah yes, the old 'jack screw'.
I remember one day in Vietnam we taxied out to the runup pad prior to take-off. When the flaps were lowered, the left wing flap came off the jack screw and was left hanging, blowing back and forth in the breeze of the prop wash.
ABORT!!!!
Didn't the FAA come close to pulling Alaska's license to do its own maintenance?
Holy moly, is that the jackscrew recovered from that accident? It looks like a tiny bolt someone forced the wrong thread pitch nut on.
It sure looks like it went through some force. I'd like to see the mating 'nut' or whatever it is that it goes through.
I think so. But they didn't. That's why I think they got bought somehow. Just my view.
I think Alaska Airlines used to use AAR for some stuff, I think avionics, not sure tho.
Yes. That's an NTSB picture of 261s' jackscrew.
Here's another pic from the NTSB:
And here's a CNN pic of the gimbal nut:
It sure looks like it went through some force.
IIRC The jackscrew initially seized up. The flight crew employed both motors (there were two) in an attempt to free the stabilizer. The combined force of the two motors stripped the threads.
Aside from how avoidable this all is & was,
Why was the thing designed like a garage door opener in the first place?
Worst that would have happened was there would have been two pilots with somewhat tired biceps.
If only. And if only they'd known that Alaska Air had been allowed to increase the interval between inspection and lubrication of the jackscrew from 600 to 2500 hours.(1)
They were still in controlled flight at the time correct?
This image (from the NTSB) show 261s' descent:
As you can see, when the initial failure occurred, they plummeted several thousand feet, after which they were apparently able to regain (at least) partial control of the aircraft.
Whether could have reached San Franscisco (or elsewhere), had they not employed both primary and secondary motors (stripping the jackscrew), I honestly don't know.
http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2000/Aka261/press0208_slides.htm
(1) A hierarchy of human error' may have doomed Alaska Flight 261
261 was a pure disaster, and adds to the reasons why I won't fly. The FAA and the airlines are in bed with each other. Safety is one of the first things to go when the money dries up.
This was a particularly horrifying death for them too, long agonizing trip to the ocean.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.