MD-80 Returns to Phoenix Airport After Reporting Problem 12:29 p.m. ET (1729 GMT) February 2, 2000 Two days after a possible stabilizer failure sent an Alaska Airlines jet crashing into the Pacific Ocean, an American Airlines MD-80 made an emergency landing in Phoenix, also after reporting a possible stabilizer problem. Airport spokeswoman Suzanne Luber said the pilot reported the problem about 20 minutes after taking off for Dallas.

The plane turned around and landed safely at Sky Harbor airport in Phoenix. There were no injuries, and passengers were boarding another plane to Dallas.

The American jet is part of the same series of McDonnell-Douglas planes as the Alaska Airlines plane that went down off the coast of California Monday.

The Alaska Airlines MD-83 reportedly had problems with its horizontal stabilizer, which controls the pitch of the aircraft's nose.

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), February 02, 2000

Answers

Were the passengers and crew worried, or just a little terrified?

-- Earl (earl.shuholm@worldnet.att.net), February 02, 2000.

2 BA Concordes made emergency landings for electronic systems failures, ca. Jan. 29, 30, 2000

1 BA Boeing 737 makes emergency landing at Heathrow, January 31, 2000.

Passenger plane with 180 on board ditches in Atlantic January 31, 2000.

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.cellrelaytower), February 02, 2000.

Is there an answer as to why these stabilizer problems are showing up now? These planes have been in the air (per the TV talking heads) since early 90's. I just don't understand it yet.

-- Sammie (sammiex0@yahoo.com), February 02, 2000.

Airline Representive: "Congratulations Captain, on getting your Passengers and Crew back in one piece, in light of this possible stabilizer problem. Is there anything that we can get or do for you?"
Captain: "A fresh pair of Underpants, a bottle of Johnny Walker Black, and all the unclothed women my poor eyes can stand!"

Nicely done Cap'n You get the Hero o' the Day award!!!

-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), February 02, 2000.

Yow!

-- fear of flying (just@got.worse), February 02, 2000.

And collision of two planes on the ground, just a few posts down.

>"<

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.cellrelaytower), February 02, 2000.

Another MD 80 jetliner incurs stabilizer problems and returns to Phoenix airport.

Story at Link

Aside - Want to see the future. CNN breaking newscenter shows todays date as

Link

December 31, 2000

Millennium 2000: Buenos Aires, New York, Washington Prepare to Meet the Millennium Millennium 2000: Who Do Americans Admire Most From the 20th Century?

-- Michael (mikeymac@uswest.net), February 02, 2000.

So much for all the media crap about Alaska Airlines "maintenance" problems. Ha!

-- Steve Baxter (chicoqh@home.com), February 02, 2000.

I now so little about hydraulics and those things but my ??? is,

Is there any way some kind of embedded system could be starting to malfunction on these babies and causing a hydraulics problem. You know maybe causing a solinoed(sp) to stay open or closed?

I know I'm going out on a limb here and I'm not trying to insight flaming.

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), February 02, 2000.

Here is a story that says the same thing the pilot in the midnight briefing did the other night - a stabilizer problem alone shouldn't have crashed flight 261.

Jammed stabilizer not fatal by itself, experienced pilots say

The original story in this thread seems to verify that.

-- Steve Baxter (chicoqh@home.com), February 02, 2000.

I bet the boys at the FAA I going to be all over this aircraft if not all ready, looking for possible clues for the Alaska Airline crash. Thank God, the pilot was able to land safely.

-- Bill (sticky@2sides.tape), February 02, 2000.

If these planes are using a GMT time reference, the time that the one in California crashed would have been just shortly after the clock rolled over to February 1. It could be that some of the embedded coding was not written to deal with a leap year in a year that ends in "00". This type of problem could happen in all planes with the same type of systems. My guess would be that this is the first time this plane in Arizona has taken off in the month of February. If that is the case, we may have a viable working theory, and all similar aircraft should be grounded.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 02, 2000.

GTE sent us a new snazzy Caller ID Box. Yesterday it displayed "1/32" all day for the date. It corrected itself after a call come thru this morning. Some things you just have to see to believe. There are little strange glitches out there.

We stopped flying last June. Love to fly, but just hafta wait it out a few more months. Risks and stakes thingy.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), February 02, 2000.

There have been several airplane poblems in Australia. There was a Korean plane and the recent African plane with problems. Some of this was due to bad aviation fuel. It may not be an embedded system. Fuel may be a more common denominator.

-- anon (anon@anon.calm), February 02, 2000.

Her there-Hawk-I see you posted the same here too. It's still warm brown bull poopy-doo!

-- Liberal Hater (liberty@bell.com), February 02, 2000.

Hawk,

First of all, leap year problems will not be evident until MARCH 1, 2000.

Second, the leap year rule is usually coded as "if year divisible by 4, year is a leap year". 2000 IS divisible by 4, so no problem.

The problem occurs in algorithms that try to calculate 1900 dates (a smaller percentage), which was not a leap year. The proper algorithm is

(a) If the number of the year is divisible by 4 then the year is a Leap Year, except

(b) If the number of the year ends in 00 then the year is not a leap year; however

(c) If the number of the year ends in 00 and the year is divisible by 400 the year is a Leap Year.

-- (@ .), February 02, 2000.

I'm not sure how relevant this is, but it's well-known that most modern airliners have what's referred to as a "glass cockpit". This is a fully-computerized suite of cockpit instruments. The crew gets virtually all flight information through visual display screens, which can be set to various modes. One mode might show a radar picture, another mode can show flight instruments such as artificial horizon, directional heading, pitch and roll, and airspeed. A third mode can show engine instruments, performance guages, etc. The bottom line is full computerization of all (or most) flight performance data necessary to get the plane from point a to point b.

Further, many modern aircraft are now configured to be "fly-by-wire" (FBW). Don't know if the MD-series is, but it's new enough it could be. In an FBW system, control inputs by the pilots result in an electronic signal being sent to actuators on the control surfaces. Interrupt this signal, and you get the same effect as a mechanical linkage failure.

Is the MD-83's horizontal stabilizer problem electrical in nature? We won't know until the NTSB finishes its investigation. If it was electrical (the flight control computers), was it a Y2K bug. I submit to you that we'll never know.......

-- Craig (sofpj@netscape.net), February 02, 2000.

Wasn't ther a chip-related causation discussed on another thread? I.e. some embedded system is responsible for guaging the airpressure or airflow over the stabilizer rudders, and this assists or overrides the manual controls. I mean, crude, laymen's recollection of my reading last night. Did anybody else catch this? It would be on one of the Alaska Airlines threads.

>"<

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.cellrelaytower), February 02, 2000.

Was speaking to a Avionics expert about the Fly By Wire situation...If there were only two people in the cockpit, it was most definitely FBW. Without computerized controls, it requires a minimum of three, usually four in the 'pit.

Instead of "your firmware has expired" think "your horizontal stabilizer has expired."

-- ~~~~ (Losing it @ Lost it .com), February 02, 2000.