UPS Plane Crash in Loiusville

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

 

[DrDawkinstein]

Lot of info in the /r/Aviation megathread here:

 

 

• Apparently the #1 engine fell off the airplane completely on the takeoff roll. Also heard from a buddy at UPS that they were on a 2 hour maintenance delay for the #1 engine before they left.
  • that would explain why the flames on the wing were so massive - not engine on fire, the fuel just gushing out of the wing, wonder what that does for systemwide fuel pressure

  • Headed to Honolulu, so massive amount of fuel onboard.

• MD-11s have a recurring issue with known, unknown problems. Phantom electrical stuff that comes and goes. They throw what parts they can at it until it powers up and send it, they have done this for a very long time. Lots of parts cannot be sourced, most is "refurbed" stuff that is not ever up to OEM spec - which wasn't great to begin with.
•  

[RkFast]

53 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

Lot of info in the /r/Aviation megathread here:

 

 

• Apparently the #1 engine fell off the airplane completely on the takeoff roll. Also heard from a buddy at UPS that they were on a 2 hour maintenance delay for the #1 engine before they left.
  • that would explain why the flames on the wing were so massive - not engine on fire, the fuel just gushing out of the wing, wonder what that does for systemwide fuel pressure

  • Headed to Honolulu, so massive amount of fuel onboard.

• MD-11s have a recurring issue with known, unknown problems. Phantom electrical stuff that comes and goes. They throw what parts they can at it until it powers up and send it, they have done this for a very long time. Lots of parts cannot be sourced, most is "refurbed" stuff that is not ever up to OEM spec - which wasn't great to begin with.
•  

 

This is very similar to American 191, where an engine fell off on takeoff from a DC-10, the predecessor to the MD-11. That was attributed to bad maintenance practices that compromised the engine mounts to the point of failure. 

 

Im not completely surprised that UPS aims the parts cannon at problems, especially for older planes like this. They, like all airlines, are under a lot of pressure to keep their planes in the air. If they are in hangars they aint making money. 

Edited Wednesday at 03:29 PM by RkFast

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

"Engine fell off."

*
WITAF does that say about the maintenance program? 🤨

[dpberr]

Flying an aging fleet with a *very* constrained parts supply chain and a dwindling pool of mechanics familiar with its complicated systems caught up to UPS.  

 

I've never understood why UPS and FedEx keep flying these planes.  There have to be plenty of used twin-jet planes to buy.  

[DrDawkinstein]

1 hour ago, dpberr said:

Flying an aging fleet with a *very* constrained parts supply chain and a dwindling pool of mechanics familiar with its complicated systems caught up to UPS.  

 

I've never understood why UPS and FedEx keep flying these planes.  There have to be plenty of used twin-jet planes to buy.  

 

What costs more? Cleaning up this mess that is probably insured in a number of ways, or proactively spending the capital to replace an entire fleet of jets?

 

The knew the risks, and I'm sure had these costs analyzed and baked in.

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

16 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

The knew the risks, and I'm sure had these costs analyzed and baked in.

A truck breaks down, and most times you park it on the shoulder of the road.  A plane breaks down, and a whole new level of crap hits the fan.

[Mike in Horseheads]

4 hours ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said:

A truck breaks down, and most times you park it on the shoulder of the road.  A plane breaks down, and a whole new level of crap hits the fan.

Can't drive to Hawaii

[ExiledInIllinois]

3 hours ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Can't drive to Hawaii

Can take a boat...

 

Boats can be operational... Working it for 50 to 100 years...

[sherpa]

Some thoughts.

Regarding age, see B-52.

Introduced 70 years ago. 

 

Airplane parts are not simply purchased without having to meet standards, no matter the supplier.

It appears the uncontrolled damage from the no. 1 engine impacted the no.2 engine, resulting in insufficient thrust to remain airborne.

Aircraft wing mounted engines are designed to separate from the aircraft before causing damage to the wing/flight controls.

It shouldn'tbe too hard to figure out why the no. 1 engine separated.

 

Regarding insurance, I'm not sure how UPS handles this, but most US airlines, since 9-11, are self insured.

 

Flying boxes is way more profitable than flying people, and cargo aircraft are a lot less expensive.

[ExiledInIllinois]

FWIW.  We are in an age when standards are being thrown out the window.  I wouldn't trust any past norm to hold true anymore.  Everything is being interrupted.

[sherpa]

53 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

FWIW.  We are in an age when standards are being thrown out the window.  I wouldn't trust any past norm to hold true anymore.  Everything is being interrupted.

 

This seems to be taking a vector that is not informed.

 

Aviation parts are subjected to what is called "technical standards order."

That means that all parts used have to meet standards that are FAA governed.

They can't be simply purchased from Amazon.

They have to be TSO compliant, or cannot be used.

[PastaJoe]

30 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

This seems to be taking a vector that is not informed.

 

Aviation parts are subjected to what is called "technical standards order."

That means that all parts used have to meet standards that are FAA governed.

They can't be simply purchased from Amazon.

They have to be TSO compliant, or cannot be used.

You’re assuming that standards are being enforced. 

[sherpa]

31 minutes ago, PastaJoe said:

You’re assuming that standards are being enforced. 

 

Yes I am.

[ExiledInIllinois]

3 hours ago, sherpa said:

 

This seems to be taking a vector that is not informed.

 

Aviation parts are subjected to what is called "technical standards order."

That means that all parts used have to meet standards that are FAA governed.

They can't be simply purchased from Amazon.

They have to be TSO compliant, or cannot be used.

I am sure they are!

 

That's sarcasm too...

2 hours ago, PastaJoe said:

You’re assuming that standards are being enforced. 

Exactly! Thank you...

https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/aog-technics-parts-falsified-faa

[ExiledInIllinois]

 

From a few years ago, but still, they always find new ways when avarice is present!  Prices are through roof with everything, just gonna make the cheats get more creative...

[sherpa]

When someone has anything definitive that asserts a counterfeit, non TSO part, I'll be the first to respond.

All of this maintenance and parts replacements are logged and the FAA has full time people assigned to monitor it at the site, as well as pilot training and other standards.

As of now, it's just uninformed people yacking.