Air Force grounds nearly 200 planes over safety question

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States Air Force said Tuesday that it had grounded nearly 200 C-135 transport planes and KC-135 in-flight refueling tanker planes to inspect the aircraft for potential problems in a stabilizer part in the tail section.

"Failure of the gear could result in a jammed stabilizer. As a result, the stabilizer could be stuck in a position that hinders the airplane from going up or down," the Air Force said in a statement.

The Air Force said 198 of the Boeing manufactured aircraft are being inspected "as a precautionary measure due to a manufacturing problem discovered during an assessment" of the stabilizer trim actuator replacement procedure.

The Air Force has 545 of the planes, which are a military variant of the Boeing 707 jetliner. The C-135 Stratolifter and the KC-135 Stratotanker are the only airplanes affected by the inspection. The Air Force also has more than 500 KC-10 Extender in-flight refueling planes.

Air Force: 'No preciptating incident' led to grounding

The Air Force statement says that "there was no precipitating incident, accident, or system failure" that led to the decision to ground the aircraft for inspection.

While some flights will have to be postponed or canceled for the time being, all high priority flight missions will be accommodated "by carefully managing the available fleet," the Air Force said.

An Air Force official told CNN that the problem appears to be with a part that has installed in some of the airplanes since September of 1999. Those suspect parts will be replaced.

The Air Force statement also says that the grounding and inspection are "in no way connected with the recent crash of the Alaska Airlines MD-80" near the coast of California, in which all 88 aboard were killed. That plane's crew reported problems with the aircraft's horizontal stabilizer, and were trying to correct them when the plane crashed. No official cause of the crash has been determined.

As a result of the Alaskan Airlines crash, the Federal Aviation Administration ordered inspections of the jackscrew assembly on all domestic MD-80 series airliner aircraft.

The MD-80 was made by McDonnell-Douglas Corporation.

---

My take on this:

Last year they realized that the embedded chips in the trim actuator system were not compliant, so they replaced them in September 1999. Now they have discovered that the chips in the new actuators are also not compliant, because the 2000 leap year was not written into the programming code.

When they say there was no precipitating "incident" they probably mean nothing that occured while in flight. My guess is that yesterday morning, Feb. 29th, several planes were started up to go out on their scheduled flights. When they went through the pre-flight check, they discovered that the stabilizer trim actuator was non-operational.

After being sent the instructional signals from the flight deck computer referencing the date of Feb. 29 for its timing calculations, the chips simply could not accept that date, and just shut down. I doubt that they would otherwise weaken our national security by grounding all 200 planes at once unless they had no choice. In other words, there is no way that these planes could fly even if they wanted them to.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), March 01, 2000

Answers

Hawk:

Do you actually know anything about the aircraft in this story? The KC-135 was first manufactured in 1957. The last planes were delivered in 1976. Everything on these planes is analog and mechanical control. They even have some systems with still use vacuum tubes for crying out loud. The parts refered to are mechanical not electronic.

If there was going to be an embedded systems problem it would be with the 500 KC-10's still flying which are much more modern and use many digital control systems.

Flight contol computers on a KC-135 that accept dates? Please, if you're going to post these outlandish theories, at least make sure that the aircraft have something remotely similar to the systems you think have failed.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), March 01, 2000.

--Hey Jim! I don't know about the questions you asked Hawk, but I do have one for you. You HONESTLY don't find this just a teensy weensy bit COINCIDENTAL? The timing? All 200? Puhleeeze! Oh ya, please explain how all these old, really old, I mean old planes flying tubes haven't been upgraded since then, like they never are, are they? So why do they even need to ever upgrade, ya know, add computers and stuff, if that good ole tube action and baling wire is still keepin em flyin? Why do they even need mechanics then, for that matter? And I haven't seen any of you aerospace engineer types yet explain aluminum shavings from steel and brass, you know, the ntsb assesment of some jack screw alledged problem. Ya know, that reason that was beat to death on the teevee? Wanna run that alchemy deal by us one more time,ya know, the "official" reason de jour so far, just for us stoopid lay persons again who can't understand engineering? I know I'd appreciate it.

-- jissadumbole (stoppidolelayman@gladwegot.real.simple.explanations.for.us.dumb.folk), March 01, 2000.

Leap Year or Not - Why would the USAF admit to grounding the planes?

It is not like they are required to report unscheduled maintenance to an oversight agency like the FAA.

Yes, the timing is weird. Right when the Taiwan Strait is heating up and we may need fighters on the deck in a hurry, we take 33% of mid- air refueling off line. The USS Kitty Hawk has left Japan for Taiwan area, so its looks like a mixed message if we send a carrier but reduce rapid troop transport and midair refueling capability.

-- Bill P (porterwn@one.net), March 01, 2000.

Hey Jim, can't you accept the possibility that this subset of KC-135s have been upgraded/revamped with modern avionics?

The military does this everywhere else. In Brazil the have $2.5 million revamping of Skyhawks A4As (1970 vintage)all the time!!! which includes avionics with tons and tons of chips and emebeddeds

Good post and great analysis Hawk

Take care ya'll

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), March 01, 2000.

Thanks, Hawk, for the post.

"No precipitating incident." Yeah, right. Give me a break.

These are the very planes associated with the chemtrail sprayings.

Chemtrail watchers have observed mid-air refueling maneuvers. Remember, these planes have been seen spraying from dawn until after dusk---long, long exercises.

Now, if these planes are up there doing their loop-d-loops for days on end, wouldn't their jackscrews get a heck of a lot of usage? The jackscrews and all the other tail assembly parts would be getting untold hours of workouts. These spraying planes, as well as their pilots, are getting an unbelievable amount of airtime. And what is the cost of all the airfuel? Maybe that is part of our petroleum crisis too; it certainly is not helping the reserves.

Ok, flame me....I'm waiting.

-- Lurkess (Lurkess@Lurking.XNet), March 01, 2000.

HAWK, Great post... it is too bad the government doesn't resign and let the people take over what was our to begin with. BRyan

-- S BRyan G III (sbrg3@juno.com), March 01, 2000.

This Country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.

Abraham Lincoln First Inaugural Address Washington, D.C. March 4, 1861

-- SB Ryan G III (sbrg3@juno.com), March 01, 2000.

Jim Cooke,

"The KC-135 was first manufactured in 1957. The last planes were delivered in 1976."

WRONG! The last planes were delivered in 1965 and 1966.

"Everything on these planes is analog and mechanical control. They even have some systems with still use vacuum tubes for crying out loud. The parts refered to are mechanical not electronic."

Not any more my friend. Do you actually believe that they would still be using 40 year old parts on these planes without upgrading them? If so, then what is this all about....

"An Air Force official told CNN that the problem appears to be with a part that has installed in some of the airplanes since September of 1999. Those suspect parts will be replaced."

Just more vacuum tubes I suppose eh? Lol- you a funny guy Jim! Wake up, this is the year 2000.

I suppose you also think it is just another coincidence of timing that the Air Force all of a sudden grounds 200 planes simultaneously, on February 29, 2000 (a once in 400 years leap year day), without any previous discussion of any possible problem with these parts.

Boeing decided to try fix on failure with our national defense Jim, and this time luck was not on their side. Those planes are dead Jim, dead as a doorknob, until they get those trim actuators replaced with some that have compliant embeddeds.

I realize that this kind of behavior by corporations is difficult for you to accept, because it puts profit concerns before the safety of the people, but that is the way it is in this day and age, when money rules the world.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), March 01, 2000.

Might I be so bold as to point out that The B-52 Strato Fortress was of a 1948 design.

Now would any dare to take the position that this venerable ( and highly modified) air frame is not digitially equiped today?

"As for me...I shall finish the Game"!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Shakey~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- Shakey (in_a_bunker@forty.feet), March 01, 2000.

Hawk et al:

You said the flight control system wouldn't accept a date. What flight control system? You made the assupmtion so what evidence do you have to support this?

You sais they replaced the "embedded chips" in the trim actuator system (whatever that is) because they were not compliant. What evidence do you have to support this statement?

Most of the upgrading that took place with these planes involved engine replacements. The electronic upgrades were mostly navigation and radios. There was nothing added to the aircraft that involved digital control of flight surfaces. Now, if you know different, why don't you provide us with the details?

Why not do some actual research rather than just coming up with theories that support your own peculiar views of the world?

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), March 01, 2000.

"What evidence do you have to support this statement?"

That's easy... 200 dead planes sitting on the tarmac when they should be out serving our country. Just a coincidence I guess (lol!), but the Air Force suddenly "decided" to do this on that once in 400 years date of Feb. 29, 2000.

What evidence do YOU have that this possibility should be excluded for no reason at all?

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), March 01, 2000.

Hawk, you're faulty a usual.

The KC-135's have been updated to replace the vacuum tube electronics. But that was limited to replacing the tubes with transistorized electronics in the 1970's and 1980's. A program to replace the transistorized systems with a high-tech, digital "glass cockpit" is still in the contract source selection process.

That contract probably won't be awarded for another year and line KC- 135's won't have digital systems for at least five years.

And while the US Air Force has at least 500 C/KC-135 aircraft they do not have 500 KC-10's. They have around 50 KC-10's, down from the original 54 they bought back in the 1980's. In fact, I don't think 500 DC-10's were ever built for all the airline users and the US Air Force KC-10 fleet.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), March 01, 2000.

Thanks Hawk! Sometimes I'm tempted to pack up and leave this spot, but posts such as this encourage me, and I'm sure many to hang in there. Many of us are gripped by an inexplicable "Knowing" that important information is deliberately withheld from us. That's why this forum is needed, and without people feeling free to share their thoughts and information, we lose.

I, for one, have a lot of questions: Why do you think the military would publicly report this? If these reports are not intended as disinformation, what other failures have occurred that we know nothing about? How are the flight systems in our high-tech arial weapons getting along?

The Scriptures admonish believers to watch and pray. Thank God for this tool that helps us to receive information, but let's not forget to pray.

-- I.M. Benedict (prayingdown@theriver.com), March 01, 2000.

Wildweasel,

You're faulty as usual, or perhaps you just have difficulty reading.

"An Air Force official told CNN that the problem appears to be with a part that has installed in some of the airplanes since September of 1999. Those suspect parts will be replaced."

It's truly amazing how some people can read but not see, or hear but not listen. Guess what it really comes down to is just plain old denial.

-- hawk (flyin@high.again), March 01, 2000.

Hawk posted It's truly amazing how some people can read but not see, or hear but not listen. Guess what it really comes down to is just plain old denial. Hawk, you want to see somebody like that? Just go stand in front of a mirror.

-- Mikey2k (mikey2k@he.wont.eat.it), March 01, 2000.

Hawk:

I'm tired of arguing this with you since you don't listen to anything that doesn't support your pet theory. I could wrong about all I have said as well. Tell you what...go to http://airdisasters.com and go to the Air Safety forum. This forum is made up mostly of airline pilots and other professionals. Post your theories there. Especially the one about digital flight controls on a KC-135 and embedded chips in the horizontal stab. See if ANY professional pilot (you know, the one's who actually take the risks everyday) thinks your theories make ANY sense.

How about it Hawk? Willing to post this stuff where there are people who can help you out with your theories? Or do you just want to post where the tinfoilers hang out?

I'll be watching the airdisasters forum. Shouldn't take long to find out if you're serious or just blowing hot air.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), March 02, 2000.

Jim Cooke,

Haven't you heard? We have aviation experts right on this forum!

You said....

"Everything on these planes is analog and mechanical control. They even have some systems with still use vacuum tubes for crying out loud. The parts refered to are mechanical not electronic."

But Wildweasel, who is a self-proclaimed aviation "expert" says...

"The KC-135's have been updated to replace the vacuum tube electronics. But that was limited to replacing the tubes with transistorized electronics in the 1970's and 1980's."

Are you saying that Wildweasel doesn't know what he is talking about? Where have you been Jim??? As I said earlier, THIS IS THE YEAR 2000, and it seems you are still living in some kind of time warp in the year 1965! Come back Jim, come back to the future! Lol!!

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

Hawk, did you see the phrase "IS one of the bidders" in WW's post? I won't accuse you of this, but most people will not solicit bids or respond with bids for a project that's already done.

Did you see the phrase "failure of the GEAR" as referring to the root cause of the problem.

Who was it who said earlier on this thread "It's truly amazing how some people can read but not see, or hear but not listen. Guess what it really comes down to is just plain old denial."? Oh yeah, it was Hawk.

-- Mike2yk (mikey2k@he.wont.eat.it), March 03, 2000.

Mikey2k you sure are kissing the Wildweasels ass aren't you? I bet the closest either of you ever got to seeing the parts of the airplane is while you were sweeping up the metal shavings off the floor of the airplane factory. I bet you guys were told to blow the shavings off the jackscrew with an airhose and you couldn't even manage to do that properly so 88 people died. Haaa haa, incompetent fools you are. Better get back to work now, your broom is waiting for you.

-- janitors (with@big.mouths), March 04, 2000.

Very clever, Hawk.

-- Mikey2k (mikey2k@he.wont.eat.it), March 04, 2000.

Lets get some facts on the table the MD80,B707,KC135 and all variants there of all share the same jackscrew assembly. When I worked for PANAM we had all kinds of problems with grains of sand getting in the jackscrews on all variants ,all models of the Boeing nighmare, the 747 has the exact same jackscrew only big time bigger. As far as the assy is concerned it works in-flight off the auto-pilot computer which is not really a computer. It works by cancelleation voltages. It is very testy and in the civilian side it was very prone to, "DUTCH ROLLS". Uncle Sams purchaseing people knew it when they got them. But its still the best multi-engined a/c in the skies. We tried adding a extra stab under the fuselage. It just makes it very sloppy to fly. The a/c itself stinks on ice as far as hands on flying goes. We had a a/c go thru the speed of sound in a dive caused by the "MACH TRIM" being accidently shut off and it was the fastest 707 in the skies it was used in the movie "DELTA FORCE" great airplane but the stab trim motor and the jackscrew are its achillyes heel. If thats its only problem then you usaf guys got a home run bye bye

-- John J. Murphy (panamjack@msn.com), February 27, 2003.