UPS MD-11 Crashes on Takeoff
- Thread starter MolaKule
- Start date
Plus, if airliners required anything like the number of maintenance hours per flight hour that the B-52 does, we'd all be crossing the Atlantic in ships and traveling domestic by train since the cost of air transport would be well beyond reach.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2021
- Messages
- 2,696
My understanding was 38,000 gallons of fuel, which would equate to about 254,000 lbs. That's a max load on an MD-11, or close to it.
Sure looked like a massive amount when it burned.
Compared to the airlines the freighter aircraft have a lot of down time. So the touch time for maintenance is far greater. Older aircraft isn’t an issue for freighter ops due to this. The airlines that fly the older aircraft just invest a lot of money in aging aircraft. Yes it’s 100% just as safe as a brand new aircraft. However delays pile up over time and at a certain point repairs get too costly. Aircraft have their own personalities. Remember these are workhorses flying everyday for decades. All machines show age no matter how well it’s Maintained. As far as the UPS tragedy will not know anything concrete until the investigation continues. Rest assured if the NTSB suggests scrapping they will be scrapped. The trijet’s were set to sunset anyways.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2021
- Messages
- 2,696
It’s extremely close to max load. I think I saw max is like 38,2xx so yeah, right there.
I'm starting to wonder if that was the actual fuel load, or if some reporter just reported the max fuel capacity.
We don't load "extra" fuel beyond what is safely needed to operate. Big airplanes never just "fill 'er up", because that is both expensive and foolish.
The airplane was likely at max gross for takeoff, because that is max revenue, but it was likely not at max fuel.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2021
- Messages
- 2,696
Probably just the reporter citing max. Kinda like every gun is a Glock when there’s a shooting.
Good question. I'm not sure how far the route is to Honolulu and if it would require max fuel load, or close. I want to say I recall seeing around 6,000 nm as the max range?
MolaKule
Staff member
Me too.
Here is a fuel burn analysis: "MD-11 fuel burn performance The fuel burn performance of the MD-11 in passenger and freighter configuration is analysed on routes of 3,600-5,800nm."
https://www.aircraft-commerce.com/wp-content/uploads/aircraft-commerce-docs1/Aircraft guides/MD-11/ISSUE 47-MD-11 OPS.pdf
Last edited:
MolaKule
Staff member
I had forgotten about the Rockwell Collins EFIS:
"weight EFIS (4 Rockwell Collins CRT screens ADI/PFD+HSI/ND displays) : 20 [kg]"
Lots of detailed data here on the MD-11:
https://www.aircraftinvestigation.info/airplanes/MD11.html
"weight EFIS (4 Rockwell Collins CRT screens ADI/PFD+HSI/ND displays) : 20 [kg]"
Lots of detailed data here on the MD-11:
https://www.aircraftinvestigation.info/airplanes/MD11.html
That only applies when there's open/green space surrounding the grounds and even then, with the right amount of $$$, errr, I mean persuasion, rules can get changed. Or in other cases, it's the airport that expands and gets closer to nearby businesses.
Apple does prioritize "now" for efficiency in this aspect. They reduce the size of the box an iPhone comes in, they drop the included ear buds, they drop the wall charger block, etc and claim "environmental" benefits, but they'll air-freights tens of thousands of iPhones, Macbooks, etc from China every day, direct to customers.
We went through Louisville a few months ago on a Friday late morning/early afternoon and even then, there was 6-10 UPS planes lined up in the air coming in to land. Those planes were likely coming from long-distance, overseas departures since they were arriving during the day.
Just open up any flight-tracker website / app and zoom into Louisville or Memphis starting around 8pm in the evening and you'll (not you, @bunnspecial since you lived there) be shocked at the number of UPS and Fedex jets arriving.
You know UPS (and many freight carriers) use freight "containers" that mimic the shape of the fuselage to maximize loading space ? There is no way those will cause the fuselage to bulge out.
That’s only for iPhones though. Most of their devices still come with the accessories. They have reduced box sizes over the years for their other devices.
That's the downside of freight service, especially with services like those from UPS, Fedex, DHL, etc. Those planes are flying from point A to point B whether they're at 10% capacity or 100% capacity. Years ago, if you shipped something using 2-day or 3-day service, you could often get things in (1) day if "the planes weren't full".
I can tell you that the flight normally is dispatched with a planned takeoff fuel of about 180,000 lbs., that is about 27,000 gallons of fuel. I would not expect it to have any more than 220,000 lbs/33,000 gallons in any case barring a strange fuel tankering scenario.
The fire bell first going off 37 seconds into the takeoff roll meant they were likely just beyond their V1 decision speed. A rejected takeoff initiated at that speed, which might’ve been the crew’s first indication of a problem, would’ve likely resulted in a similar outcome. At maximum takeoff weight, 630,000 lbs, V1 would’ve been about 165 knots/190 mph. Vr ~ 175, V2 ~ 185 knots. These are estimates depending on exact weights and weather conditions. The accelerate-stop distance is typically the limiting distance in unbalanced field takeoff performance calculations so any reject after v1 in this circumstance probably means they go off the end. Two engines inoperative performance is not included in the calculations.
The accident airline has about 300 airplanes. Grounding the MD-11, due to the airplane’s size, likely represents a 20% decrease in volume capacity. Maybe more considering their Western Global contractor during the 4th quarter peak volume holiday also operates 15 of the type. The reduced runway length at SDF as a consequence of the accident runway being closed is also likely impacting payload capability on long haul flights for the 747 & 767, which will be increasing their operational pace to compensate.
The fire bell first going off 37 seconds into the takeoff roll meant they were likely just beyond their V1 decision speed. A rejected takeoff initiated at that speed, which might’ve been the crew’s first indication of a problem, would’ve likely resulted in a similar outcome. At maximum takeoff weight, 630,000 lbs, V1 would’ve been about 165 knots/190 mph. Vr ~ 175, V2 ~ 185 knots. These are estimates depending on exact weights and weather conditions. The accelerate-stop distance is typically the limiting distance in unbalanced field takeoff performance calculations so any reject after v1 in this circumstance probably means they go off the end. Two engines inoperative performance is not included in the calculations.
The accident airline has about 300 airplanes. Grounding the MD-11, due to the airplane’s size, likely represents a 20% decrease in volume capacity. Maybe more considering their Western Global contractor during the 4th quarter peak volume holiday also operates 15 of the type. The reduced runway length at SDF as a consequence of the accident runway being closed is also likely impacting payload capability on long haul flights for the 747 & 767, which will be increasing their operational pace to compensate.
Last edited:
Plus they are locked into place on tracks so they dont move at all....
They are now, but it might have been different back in the early DC-8 days. Plus, it might depend on the operator. I've seen, many years ago, cargo planes loaded with all kinds of pallets. Certainly nowadays they are not only more efficient by matching the fuselage shape and locking down, but they are also easier to weigh and distribute accordingly to properly balance the airplane.
There are probably still places you can go in the world where cargo isn't handled so efficiently and methodically, though.
I remember the DC3 bringing pallets to our usaf base in Alaska....They were tied down....and not very secure either....
That's the reason that the lower tier services are offered. The carriers figure they can get it there on a space available basis in two or three days and at least gain some marginal revenue. Also, even if an outbound is way light the backhaul might be sufficient to make the economics work for any given trip.
The same is true for passenger flights, although you rarely get one with only a handful of passengers these days.
After all, the airplane and crew need to be where they were planned to be for the next flight. When this is interrupted due to weather or IT failures all sorts of chaos ensues that takes days to work out.
UPS, Fedex, etc are definitely using pods.
I know with Fedex, they even transport those pods from the nearest airport to the hubs that their vans make the final deliveries from. I thought they used to have unloading/sorting operations at each airport but they seem to have eliminated that (and it makes perfect sense).
Similar threads
