Mcdonnell Douglas Aircraft CO MD-88 accident near Saltillo, Outside the U.S., March 24, 2023
On March 24, 2023 at about 5:15 pm local time, a 1990 Mcdonnell Douglas Aircraft CO MD-88, registered N834US, was substantially damaged in an accident during landing near Saltillo, Outside the U.S. (Saltillo/Plan De Guadalupe Int airport). It was flown under scheduled airline rules (Part 121). No one was hurt; 3 people were on board or involved. The weather was visual conditions (good weather).
The NTSB's probable cause their words, unchanged
The pilot's failure to adequately compensate for a wind shift while on short final approach which resulted in a higher than normal sink rate and a tailstrike.
Source: NTSB aviation accident database, copy made October 5, 2026. Docket and reports at the NTSB.
What the record shows
- Date
- March 24, 2023 · about 5:15 pm local time
- Place
- Saltillo, Mexico · Saltillo/Plan De Guadalupe Int · map
- Type
- Accident
- Injuries
- No one was hurt; 3 people were on board or involved.
- Weather
- visual conditions (good weather)
- Aircraft
- Mcdonnell Douglas Aircraft CO MD-88, built 1990 · all MD-88s on the register
- Registration
- N834US · registry record · serial 53115
- Damage
- Substantial damage
- Flight
- Flight · scheduled airline rules (Part 121)
The NTSB's narrative final · quoted from the NTSB record
USA Jet Airlines, flight JUS834, sustained a tailstrike while landing at the Saltillo/Plan De Guadalupe International Airport (SLW), Saltillo, Mexico. After the event, the airplane completed two additional flights before the damage was discovered by maintenance personnel. The flight was an on-demand international cargo flight from Willow Run Airport (YIP), Detroit, Michigan, to SLW. The flight crew stated that, upon arrival at SLW, they conducted an instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 17. A review of flight data recorder (FDR) data revealed that the autopilot and autothrottle were disconnected at about 1,400 ft above ground level (agl). The airplane was in a stabilized configuration on approach, with glideslope and localizer deviations of less than one dot. Airspeed varied by less than 5 knots and the sink rate was less than 1,000 feet per minute (fpm). The crew indicated that the flight was “slightly bumpy” on final approach with small fluctuations in airspeed. They stated that it felt as though the wind had shifted or dissipated rapidly while approaching 50 feet agl resulting in a higher-than-normal sink rate. FDR data showed that near 80 ft radio altitude (RA), the aircraft’s sink rate began to increase rapidly, indicating a sudden decrease in headwind. The control column was deflected airplane nose-up (ANU) in an apparent attempt to arrest the sink rate. FDR data showed that the control column remained deflected ANU until about 30 ft RA, when the airplane’s pitch increased to nearly 5 degrees ANU. Subsequently, an airplane nose-down (AND) column input was initiated. The airplane continued to descend at a sink rate of over 15 feet per second (fps) just before touchdown, resulting in a hard landing with a peak vertical acceleration of 3.24 gravitational force equivalent (g). The tail strike likely occurred at the touchdown point where the airplane's pitch attitude reached approximately 8 degrees, exceeding the attitude limit where the aft body of the aircraft would contact the ground I don’t see anything in the docket supporting this? Did this come from a manufacturer's manual we can add a page from? They have a graph or chart usually that has this info. once the landing gear was compressed. Based on this information, and a review of several takeoffs and landings led to the determination that the tailstrike occurred at SLW. The crew indicated that the aircraft touched down harder than normal, that the airplane did not bounce, and they did not feel as if a tail strike had occurred. During a post-flight inspection at SLW, the crew stated that they did not observe any damage to the fuselage and the tail skid assembly's tailstrike indicator was in a horizontal position (parallel to the fuselage), indicating a tail strike had not occurred, see figure 1. The trip continued from SLW to Windsor Airport (YQG), Windsor, Ontario Canada, and then to YIP. During a maintenance pre-flight inspection at YIP a day after the accident, external damage to the fuselage, missed during the flight crew’s walk-around in SLW, was discovered. Further inspection of the airplane revealed substantial damage to internal structural members of the lower fuselage. Indicator Figure 1. Photo of skid assembly on airplane with tailstrike indicator position shown. (Source: Boeing) The tail skid assembly was removed from the airplane and sent to the Boeing equipment quality analysis (EQA) laboratory for examination. No mechanical anomalies were found with the unit that would have affected the tail bumper strut from properly stroking and rebounding when pressurized and installed on the airplane. Although contamination, metallic and organic, larger than the design specification was found within the unit, it could not be determined how it affected the operation of the unit.
The complete narrative as the NTSB published it. The NTSB's docket holds the report as a PDF and any photographs, statements and other documents from the investigation.
The factual record from the NTSB's investigation tables, in plain English
What happened, in order
- Tailstrike during landing defining event
The NTSB's findings
- Environmental issues › Operating environment › (general) › (general) › Ability to respond/compensate
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 13,580 hours in all; 3,852 in this make and model; 183 in the last 90 days; 75 in the last 30 days; 11,535 as pilot in command; 800 on instruments
- Last flight review: January 14, 2023
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (with waivers/limitations)
- Seat: left
- Injury: no injuries
Pilot
- Certificate: airline transport pilot, flight instructor, commercial pilot, private
- Ratings: multi-engine land; single-engine land; instructor: airplane single-engine; instructor: instrument airplane; instrument: airplane
- Flight time: 1,528 hours in all; 267 in this make and model; 84 in the last 90 days; 42 in the last 30 days; 1,080 as pilot in command; 882 on instruments
- Medical certificate: Class 1 (without waivers/limitations)
- Seat: rgt
- Injury: no injuries
The aircraft
- Airframe total time: 75,835 hours
- Last inspection: inspection type not recorded, March 21, 2023
- Maximum gross weight: 149,500 lb
- Seats: 8
- Landing gear: retractable
- Engine 1: P & W JT8D SERIES (turbojet); 0 hours total
- Engine 2: P & W JT8D SERIES (turbojet); 0 hours total
- Operator: USA Jet Airlines INC
The flight
- Departed from: KYIP Belleville MI at 12:35 pm
- Flight plan: IFR
- Runway 17, 9,456 ft by 148 ft
- A second pilot was aboard
Weather at the time
- Light: daylight
- Wind: from 180° at 10 knots
- Sky: clear
- Temperature: 0°F (-18°C), dew point 0°F (-18°C)
- Observation at 4:58 pm from MMIO
Injuries
| Fatal | Serious | Minor | None | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flight crew | 2 | |||
| Passengers | 1 |
Documents from the investigation the NTSB's docket: the evidence folder behind the report
1 document, released by the NTSB on July 18, 2024. View them here, or download them; the NTSB redacts some personal details before release, and this site shows the NTSB's own titles rather than its file names.
| # | Document | What it is | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pilot/operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1 | PDF, 11 pages | View Download |
The same docket at the NTSB · documents without a copy here are fetched from the NTSB when you open them.
Everything on this page comes from the NTSB's public records. The narrative, probable cause and findings are the NTSB's own words; the coded tables behind the report are written out in plain English, with pilots' ages, home towns and medical details left out. The documents and photographs are the NTSB's docket, shown as the NTSB released them. This site's own text never names anyone involved. A preliminary report can change; the final report usually follows one to two years later, and the page is refreshed when it does.
