Jump to content

UPS Airlines crash on take off at Louisville Airport.


Recommended Posts

Posted
28 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


WTF? At the end of the 2 hours of maintenance, did the “check to make sure you reattached the engine” box not get checked?

Final step:  Count the number of leftover parts in your possession.  If that number is greater than zero, you fucked up.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
22 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

So let me see if this sounds right/plausible.

#1 has an uncontained fan failure, sheers off and debris shreds the other engine on the wing. While that engine is failing the hole from #1 is spraying jet fuel all over the tarmac and everything else.

Plane impacts the plant at the end of the runway and flash fire ignites all the fuel trail and we get the apocalypse now napalm fire ball from the clip up top?

It looks like the tail mounted engine is having compressor stalls right as the plane rotates. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Engine falling off is exceedingly rare.  Single digit number of times in modern commercial aviation history.  Even this model engine has had multiple instances of fan blade failure and cowlings coming off without engine departing.  More to the story.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, ClubWhatever said:

Engine falling off is exceedingly rare.  Single digit number of times in modern commercial aviation history.  Even this model engine has had multiple instances of fan blade failure and cowlings coming off without engine departing.  More to the story.

What is being implied here?

Posted
1 hour ago, freyguy said:

Final step:  Count the number of leftover parts in your possession.  If that number is greater than zero, you fucked up.  

I think they give you some extras, like in a lego kit.  

Posted (edited)

Google tells me the last md-11 was built in 2000, so that airframe is at least 25 years old.  Is that old for a plane with the hours it likely has put in? Would key items like engines have been replaced at prescribed intervals?

Edited by Pato del Muerto
Posted
3 hours ago, Vato Macho said:

A good friend of mine is an international UPS pilot. It seems like a pretty awesome job. You hear all the cool stories and kind of forget there’s this danger involved. I should get some intel at a band competition tomorrow. 

I have several questions. On to page 2 to see if you have been frisked…..

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Bevo said:

 

 

I use to live on a street that had 5 or 6 UPS pilots on it. Have they announced the name of the pilot, yet?

image.png.78a3ce989d1896de1f201eaee176088f.png

Edited by Beau Vine
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Surly pilots/aeros chime in...

 

I won't even pretend to know shit about fuck concerning airplane stuff, flying, and whatnot. This ignorance led me to google the phrase "compressor stall," which brought up this helpful video, timestamped to a good explanation that even I could understand.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Google tells me the last md-11 was built in 2000, so that airframe is at least 25 years old.  Is that old for a plane with the hours it likely has put in? Would key items like engines have been replaced at prescribed intervals?

Generally speaking, unless something suffers a catastrophic failure, the engines last as long as the planes. They get overhauls, regular inspections and cleanings, but don’t get replaced  on any kind of 100,000 mile power train warranty program or anything. 
 

In fact, they’re often leased, as are the airframes, in power by the hour agreements. 
 

One of the reasons turbine engines are so reliable and long lasting despite extremes in temperature and pressure is that they just spin. No cylinders etc reversing direction thousands of times per minute to induce wear. They tend to last a long, long time if cared for. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted

Also, old is a relative term for an airplane. Cycles of pressurizations,  takeoffs and landings, and maximum power applications are more limiting than pure hours not unlike the difference in road miles on a car versus stop and go driving. A long haul plane like an MD-11 will typically have many hours, but relatively fewer cycles than a smaller narrow body domestic airliner like a 737 or A320. On the latter the cycles to hours ratio often runs a little more than 3:1 with an 80k hour airframe having 30k cycles whereas a wide body jet might be 5-6:1 or better. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
4 hours ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

Also, old is a relative term for an airplane. Cycles of pressurizations,  takeoffs and landings, and maximum power applications are more limiting than pure hours not unlike the difference in road miles on a car versus stop and go driving. A long haul plane like an MD-11 will typically have many hours, but relatively fewer cycles than a smaller narrow body domestic airliner like a 737 or A320. On the latter the cycles to hours ratio often runs a little more than 3:1 with an 80k hour airframe having 30k cycles whereas a wide body jet might be 5-6:1 or better. 

Hence the Hawaii Air 737s becoming targa tops in flight (lotta pressure cycles).

One of the more fascinating things I'll never forget.  My senior project sponsor was LTV.  We went up there to tour their facility.  At the time, they were rebuilding A7s for sale to smaller countries.  So they had an A7 airframe/wingless fuselage up on a giant jig, with hydraulic cylinders at the nose and tail and it was fixed around the wing box.  The cylinders were pushing the nose and tail up and down relative to the wing box to find the real-world fatigue limits of the airframe.  Notable was that the nose and tail were being deflected nearly a foot upward relative to the wing box.  You don't think of that kind of deflection in an airframe, but I guess it happens.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Google tells me the last md-11 was built in 2000, so that airframe is at least 25 years old.  Is that old for a plane with the hours it likely has put in? Would key items like engines have been replaced at prescribed intervals?

25 years is pretty much the average for a cargo plane. Passenger airlines will offload before to a cargo company or overseas budget carrier not because the airplane isn’t safe— just that the needed maintenance, plus cabin overhaul to meet passenger standards, plus savings on more efficient newer models means that hanging on isn’t worth it. 
 

@Bobby_Batronic explained a lot about the stressors on critical components and the long life of turbines due to design. Airplanes don’t age like cars, the prescribed obsessive maintenance and the scheduled complete tear-down/rebuilds mean that for the most part you can safely fly an airplane for as long as you want to throw money at it. The USAF intends to keep B-52s in service for about a century of use. (Also a plane that flys lots of long hours as opposed to quick hops). 
 

The key here is “if the maintenance is done and money thrown at it.” Usually you can trust major carriers and developed countries to do that. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

It looks like the tail mounted engine is having compressor stalls right as the plane rotates. 

What are you seeing that indicates this?  

Edited by Chad Fuck
*nevermind, I saw it. Should have kept reading, per usual. d'oh!
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

What are you seeing that indicates this?  

And, what are the odds that two engines have issues simultaneously?  Flock of birds  and happened to catch two?  Something eject from the wing engine that caught the fan of the rear?

if two engines are providing no thrust, that’s why it couldn’t get off the ground, at least with a plane at max weight?

Edited by Pato del Muerto
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

And, what are the odds that two engines have issues simultaneously?  Flock of birds  and happened to catch two?  Something eject from the wing engine that caught the turbine of the rear?

The later seems more likely.  #1 engine fails and throws debris everywhere, #2 engine sucks up the debris and then that's all she wrote. 

Edited by Chad Fuck
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:


I saw a slow down of one video that may indicate that. Two flashes that come out of that engine. I can’t find it now.

It's upthread.  Pretty clear flashes indicating the compressor stall.  Almost certain #2 took in FOD from #1.  

Posted
1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The USAF intends to keep B-52s in service for about a century of use. (Also a plane that flys lots of long hours as opposed to quick hops). 

So the airplane equivalent of the Ship of Theseus?

Because those things have been heavily rebuilt.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

So the airplane equivalent of the Ship of Theseus?

Because those things have been heavily rebuilt.

Crew Chiefs are looking up fonts for "Ship of Theseus" nose art as we speak...

Posted
12 hours ago, ClubWhatever said:

Engine falling off is exceedingly rare.  Single digit number of times in modern commercial aviation history.  Even this model engine has had multiple instances of fan blade failure and cowlings coming off without engine departing.  More to the story.

engines falling off are uncommon in part because the temporal wormholes they cause. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
It's upthread.  Pretty clear flashes indicating the compressor stall.  Almost certain #2 took in FOD from #1.  

This happened to a Continental DC-10 departing EWR maybe 20 years ago. They were able to limp back around and land.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
14 hours ago, Chopper said:

 

Is it just me, or is the tail and rear section of the fuselage missing by the time the plane comes into view in this dashcam video? Did the tail end separate when it hit the UPS building?

Posted
43 minutes ago, Iowa Horn said:

Is it just me, or is the tail and rear section of the fuselage missing by the time the plane comes into view in this dashcam video? Did the tail end separate when it hit the UPS building?

Hard to say.  Could just be engulfed by flame.  Certainly it's been separated by the time the video ends.  

Posted
4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

So the airplane equivalent of the Ship of Theseus?

Because those things have been heavily rebuilt.

Not as much as you might think when you get up close. It’s awesome, very analog airplane, steampunk vibes.
 

 

4 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

Crew Chiefs are looking up fonts for "Ship of Theseus" nose art as we speak...

 

Lots of hot young Athenian babes in togas on that ship……

Posted
7 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Not as much as you might think when you get up close. It’s awesome, very analog airplane, steampunk vibes.
 

 

 

Lots of hot young Athenian babes in togas on that ship…

They're pretty interchangeable.

Posted
4 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

You sure that’s not a Kentucky processed raccoon franchise?

Kentucky Pan-fried Raccoon. 

Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Chopper said:

dashcam view

 

Damn. It was in full massive explosion mode the millisecond its tail clipped a building.

There also looks like a blue arc flash at the moment of first impact.

Edited by aggie08
Posted
16 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

Damn. It was in full massive explosion mode the millisecond its tail clipped a building.

There also looks like a blue arc flash at the moment of first impact.

It clipped a power line.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 hours ago, Orange-4-Life said:

UPS sorting facility at the end of the runway. The KPR site is just at the bottom of this picture on Grade Ln.

[IMG]

That’s taking last mile delivery to an extreme.

Posted

NTSB briefing confirmed #1 engine departed the left wing on the runway and #2 compressor stalls.

Said the report of the plane being delayed for maintenance was refuted by UPS which said the plane was not delayed but on schedule.

Posted
2 hours ago, aggie08 said:

Damn. It was in full massive explosion mode the millisecond its tail clipped a building.

There also looks like a blue arc flash at the moment of first impact.

2 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

It clipped a power line.

image.png.fc601794d16a4b6bcfb7520004738cfb.png

Posted
8 minutes ago, jkates said:

NTSB briefing confirmed #1 engine departed the left wing on the runway and #2 compressor stalls.

Said the report of the plane being delayed for maintenance was refuted by UPS which said the plane was not delayed but on schedule.

4c6ab9ef-2d50-4d42-80d6-af49e0f0215d_text.gif.a4be5ddab3d96fc6fa7cba733f202491.gif3b16a51b-ad7e-4832-8ba9-22c32d700ed0_text.gif.ca616f7b8aeaf0136106889fcb0f647e.gif

Posted
49 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

 

I might tend to call that more than a "piece of cowling."   That seems to include a sizable chunk of the compressor intake.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...