UPS MD-11 Crashes on Takeoff

RedSpider said:
Having worked on some of the last flying DC-8's in the U.S. I can assure anyone that at no time was one ever loaded to the point where the fuselage bulged. That would have produced significant visible damage on the inside that even our most incompetent inspector never would have missed.
Click to expand...
I stand by my comments and have total confidence that John was telling me the truth. One thing that made John a good pilot was that no way he would have flown a multi-engine jet aircraft that he felt was unsafe. I doubt this area was seriously damaged, just visibly damaged when looking at it from the right angle.

He did the unsafe thing when he first started flying for money (mid 1970s). He used to fly a single engine Cessna at night from San Jose to Seattle for some next day film developing company. John said that was the most dangerous flying he's ever done in his life.

Scott

Edit: This isn't John (but he shares the gray hair with these guys), but it's a 747-400 landing at Anchorage. Anchorage was where he was based. I sent this video to him several months ago and he replied, "Yep, it can be pretty bumpy flying into Anchorage".

A cool video if you haven;t seen it.

Scott

 
Last edited:
There must have been at least 2, more likely 3 freak things happened to cause this horrible crash. I’ve read that it’s usually 3 y bad events that cause these horrific crashes.
 
RedSpider said:
Having worked on some of the last flying DC-8's in the U.S. I can assure anyone that at no time was one ever loaded to the point where the fuselage bulged. That would have produced significant visible damage on the inside that even our most incompetent inspector never would have missed.View attachment 308673
Click to expand...
Especially on a pressurized airplane. Dent limits are actually quite shallow and every last one has to be analyzed, mapped and cataloged for tracking. At least for the airplanes I’ve been associated with you would not be able to see such a thing from the cockpit.
 
Business News Today:

"...The aircraft departed Louisville at approximately 5:15 p.m. local time, but within seconds, video footage captured signs of engine trouble. Eyewitnesses and air traffic tracking confirmed the plane struggled to gain altitude, reaching only about 175 feet before beginning an uncontrolled descent..."

Conjecture: It appears the plane's speed was at or about V1 and attempted to rotate. Did the engine separate before or at V1? I doubt the crew knew of their dire situation. This is something the NTSB will undoubtedly be looking at.

"...Flames were visibly emanating from the left wing, according to preliminary footage, suggesting a serious fire or structural malfunction. The aircraft ultimately crashed in an industrial zone, impacting structures near a petroleum recycling plant and an auto-parts warehouse. The wreckage ignited a significant fireball, according to emergency crews, and debris was scattered across a wide radius..."

The plane rolled/yawed to the left, which indicates the #3 engine was still providing thrust. The only major heat source would be the #1 engine. If the engine broke away with fuel pumps running, then fire would have ensued, being ignited by the engine. But why did the engine separate?

Blowing up the picture of the engine in the grass, it appears the area near the turbine containment ring is damaged (to be further analyzed). Conjecture: One or more turbine blade separations occurred, rupturing the containment ring and sending debris into the pylon structure and the #2 engine. An engine pylon is a rather hefty structure, but if a catastrophic stoppage of the turbine section occurred due to lodged debris, a large torquing moment will be present, possibly twisting the engine off its pylon. Fuse bolts in the pylon are designed to allow engine breakaway in these situations.

Anyway, those are my theories, and the NTSB will have a lot of failure points to investigate. Undoubtedly, this will be a case of a cascading series of events, as is usually the case.
 
Anyone know if UPS does their own heavy maintenance…. or is it outsourced to a FAA approved repair station / 3rd party organization ?
 
Another interesting dash cam:



IMG_0346.webp
 
NTSB said UPS reported to them that there was no delay for unscheduled maintenance prior to the aircraft taking off. They said the'd verify that, but it was the info they were given today by UPS, which appears to dispel the rumor that this was the case.
 
Last edited:
Dave Hess said:
My dad was an A&P mechanic for PanAm and worked on the 707, 727, 747 and DC-10 at MIA maintenance base.

Sometimes the mechanics would have to walk off the job if management tried to pressure them to sign off on an unsafe aircraft that needed to be grounded and had a major safety issue. The MIA union would immediately call JFK maintenance base and all the mechanics there would walk off the job in New York (and vise versa).

The machinists union could NOT be bullied by Pan Am management.
He needed to walk off the job about 20 times in his 27 year career at Pan Am.
If a flight is delayed 8 hours….. too bad. The passengers can wait.

—————————————————

I’m not saying the UPS mechanic did anything wrong.

Was he pressured to get that MD-11 in the air due to tight timeline and no spare MD-11 to transfer all cargo to backup aircraft ?

The mechanics that touched that MD-11 might have already hired attorneys and keeping their mouth shut.
Click to expand...
Many years ago, my boss' good friend, John, was a mechanic for UPS out of Newark (NJ). On one occasion, he refused to allow an aircraft to depart because the captain's seat adjustment was broken. His supervisor demanded that John sign off and release that flight. John refused and suggested that the supervisor sign it himself. The supervisor wouldn't do it either, the flight got delayed until the seat was fixed, and John got suspended for a week without pay.
 
y_p_w said:
Pretty poor for an MD-11. Twinjets are far more efficient.

But cargo airlines are different. They tend to fly shorter routes, and there are a lot of older planes sold cheap. They don’t work them that hard. They can justify the fuel burn when the acquisition costs are low. FedEx and UPS were operating 727s for decades where they were mostly passenger castoffs. FedEx even developed (and sold) “hush kits” to make them quieter to comply with noise limits.

You can look at the UPS Airlines fleet. Other than the 747-8F, all older planes. I’m hearing all their MD-11 fleet was converted passenger planes. But I suppose they could justify the 747 for their longer routes since they need the range. I’ve heard that they ship stuff like Apple devices directly from the factories in China/India to consumers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UPS_Airlines#Current_fleet
Click to expand...
Even A340 was more efficient, 11% more efficient. FinnAir dumped MD11 for A340 as soon as they could.
 
MolaKule said:
Business News Today:

"...The aircraft departed Louisville at approximately 5:15 p.m. local time, but within seconds, video footage captured signs of engine trouble. Eyewitnesses and air traffic tracking confirmed the plane struggled to gain altitude, reaching only about 175 feet before beginning an uncontrolled descent..."

Conjecture: It appears the plane's speed was at or about V1 and attempted to rotate. Did the engine separate before or at V1? I doubt the crew knew of their dire situation. This is something the NTSB will undoubtedly be looking at.

"...Flames were visibly emanating from the left wing, according to preliminary footage, suggesting a serious fire or structural malfunction. The aircraft ultimately crashed in an industrial zone, impacting structures near a petroleum recycling plant and an auto-parts warehouse. The wreckage ignited a significant fireball, according to emergency crews, and debris was scattered across a wide radius..."

The plane rolled/yawed to the left, which indicates the #3 engine was still providing thrust. The only major heat source would be the #1 engine. If the engine broke away with fuel pumps running, then fire would have ensued, being ignited by the engine. But why did the engine separate?

Blowing up the picture of the engine in the grass, it appears the area near the turbine containment ring is damaged (to be further analyzed). Conjecture: One or more turbine blade separations occurred, rupturing the containment ring and sending debris into the pylon structure and the #2 engine. An engine pylon is a rather hefty structure, but if a catastrophic stoppage of the turbine section occurred due to lodged debris, a large torquing moment will be present, possibly twisting the engine off its pylon. Fuse bolts in the pylon are designed to allow engine breakaway in these situations.

Anyway, those are my theories, and the NTSB will have a lot of failure points to investigate. Undoubtedly, this will be a case of a cascading series of events, as is usually the case.
Click to expand...
As of this morning it's now being compared to AA 191 as early reports from the ntsb are saying that the left engine detached at the point of takeoff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wwillson
Flying the Boeing 757-200
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
9K
Dave Hess
y_p_w
Trevor Jacob pleads guilty to obstruction for covering up deliberate crash where he bailed out
Replies
13
Views
2K
ctechbob
I
HPL basic PCMO 5w-30 (-40) 9.7k mi, 11 months; Ford EB3.5 Transit 92.3k mi - used oil analysis
Replies
7
Views
328
Impatient
pezzy84
Rental car review - 2025 VW Jetta 1.5T.
Replies
14
Views
1K
gregk24
Brons2
Making oil with a Peugeot 3008 in Spain (Rental Car Review)
Replies
13
Views
2K
Brons2
Back
Top Bottom