Cause and Effect of the Crash of Alaska Airlines Flight261 - Essay Example

 Cause and Effect of the Crash of Alaska Airlines Flight261 Causes Alaska Airlines (AA) Flight 261 had a fateful crash on January 31, 2000. Fourteen years after the incident, talks about it still linger mainly because the relatives of the fallen passengers still recall the incident. They hope same thing will not happen again. The plane crash claimed the lives of 88 people including the airplane’s crew, pilot and captain, and only the remains of the bodies and the plane parts were found after the plane crashed and exploded in the depth of the Pacific Ocean. AA Flight 261 was operating on a scheduled international flight from Mexico Airport, with an intervening destination at Seattle, Washington Airport, then stop at San Francisco airport. Upon investigation of authorities, the National Transportation Safety Board said that the probable cause of the accident was “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 (NSTB, January 31, 2000). But when I watched the video and upon reading the transcriptions of the investigations of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), I realized that the jack-screw is only a participating evident of inefficiencies of the system. The circle of event shows inefficiencies on the maintenance system of the Alaska Airlines; as mechanics and authorities of the airlines dismissed warnings that the jack screw is already overused and that it may caused future problems. Perhaps reason for this is the cost of replacement is expensive. However, had it been regularly oiled and lubricated, the problem maybe did not exist. Clearly, at this level of ground maintenance, something is already amiss. Going to the pilots, there is no reason not to believe they are experts in their fields, but the captain lacked the will to exercise its authority to act in an emergency. Upon knowing of the problem at the tail of the aircraft, they had plenty of time to return, or land in the nearest field. The captain wanted to emergency land in Los Angeles airport, but was discouraged by the Alaskan Airlines operator at the Tower because of the repercussions the landing would create. At the time before the plane crashed, the pilots did everything to control the plane including a maneuver of a vertical dive position of the plane. I could imagine the horror and terror felt by everybody in the plane who was hanging on their seatbelts before the plane nose-dived to the ocean. After a lot of effort, AA261 was out of control, and did not reach its destination, but headed on to crash. Effects. The operator at the tower was probably unaware of the urgency of the situation that he did not listen to the request of the captain of AA26. This was an exercise of misjudgment and incompetency. To the tune of what happened with the investigations, the NTSB concluded the extended maintenance, lack of adequate greasing and adequate design were the causes of the crash. On this, NTSB recommended to the National Aviation Administration on October 1, 2001, to require the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group to revise the lubrication procedure for the horizontal stabilizer trim system of its Douglas series airplanes to minimize the probability of inadequate lubrication. Furthermore, the NTSB recommended revision of check procedure of horizontal trim stabilizer and to conduct a study on its appropriateness against the standard practices. NTSB likewise recommended personnel should undergo specialized training for this work and responsibilities. A series of recommendations to the AAB were designed by the NTSB to correct the lubricating system; training, etc, all of which pertains to the improvement of maintenance of AA aircrafts. On the passengers’ side, in a gathering which was done to commemorate the plane crash and death of its passengers, relatives were still angry with the company because they perceived the loss was preventable and points to corruption and greed prevailing not only in the company but to the industry as well. They recalled victimization of several people who claimed paternity, all for money. They also suffered discrimination from insurance companies of the airlines that put a price tag on victims based on their jobs and potential income. The relatives’ victims just wanted the story to be remembered and the lessons it beholds so that the people behind the desks, the people who value money over safety, the people who will cut corners, will not be lulled into thinking they can relax (Christine Clarridge, Feb. 2, 2010). The AA management promised that the lives of the victims will not be in vain, and that they will make sure this tragedy will not happen again. Conclusion The cause and effect analysis of this article shows human error as one of the causes of the African Airlines Flight 261 disaster. We see negligence on the part of the maintenance crew, carelessness and no-care attitude of management. The purported cover up by law enforcements on flaws of the system is a manifestation of lack of concern for safety of passengers not only of the African Air Lines but by the safety management offices as well. Although not openly discussed, the interventions of the law enforcement agencies limits the technical investigators’ access to certain essential facts, maintenance records and personal interviews. (Lindsay Fenwick and Huhn, Michael, May 2003, p. 17) The effects it has inflicted to the families of victims will forever be remembered and remain as a scar in their memories. It was a senseless death that could have been avoided if only the airline did not renege on its promise to fly passengers safely to their destination. The damage caused to the airline is not only its profitability, but its integrity and pride as a safe carrier in the industry. And the only thing it could do to gain trust of passengers is to level up its maintenance efforts from the aircraft, up to the pilots and crew. References cited Christine Clarridge, Feb. 2, 2010) 10th Anniversary of Alaska Flight 261. The Seattle Times. http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2010922467_alaska29m.html Lindsay Fenwick and Huhn, Michael, (May 2003, p. 17) Criminal Liability & Aircraft Accident Investigation. Air line pilot and Senior Staff Engineer http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/magazine/2003/May2003_CriminalLiability.htm NSTB, January 31, 2000. Aircraft Accident Report. http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/summary/AAR0201.htm Read More