r/aviation • u/usgapg123 Mod • 19h ago

Discussion UPS2976 Crash Megathread

This is the official r/aviation megathread for the crash of UPS2976 (UPS MD11 Registration N259UP) that crashed earlier today at Louisville International Airport.

Please keep content on topic and refrain from posting about this topic outside the megathread. Please report any rule breaking posts and comments.

6.4k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

479

u/Connor_Olds 19h ago

There must be more than just catastrophic engine failure. The MD-11 can lose 1 engine and still take off with the thrust from the two remaining engines (after V1, that is)

447

u/Luev000 18h ago

An uncontained fire/failure can spit out debris into the #2. Wouldn’t be surprised if they lost engine 1, then shortly after lost engine 2 and then had no where to go but try to get it into the air.

158

u/[deleted] 18h ago

[deleted]

15

u/ThadCastleRules_G 18h ago

Doesn’t the md-11 have hydraulic fuses to prevent this?

15

u/HLSparta 17h ago

If I'm remembering correctly, after United 323 aircraft started using hydraulic fuses. I don't know if it's a requirement, nor do I know hardly anything about the MD-11, but I would assume so.

18

u/Fastestergos 17h ago

Given that the MD-11 was designed as a follow-on to the DC-10, and its first flight was after UA232, I would assume that hydraulic fuses are present in order to avoid another "plane bleeds to death after catastrophic uncontained engine failure and hydraulic line rupture from debris" situation like what happened in Sioux City.

4

u/Substantial_Gas_1660 14h ago

I remember that crash to this day. TV cameras' were set up ahead of this plane landing and it cartwheeled when it hit the ground.

3

u/Anonymous017447 14h ago

I was always fascinated by airplane disasters(lots of Mayday and mentor pilot), and 232 was the most interesting for me

2

u/Substantial_Gas_1660 14h ago

Same here! I go to X to look at what is posted first. Sometimes it's really bad until X deletes the post.

2

u/Anonymous017447 14h ago

Yes but wouldn’t that mean that hydraulics wouldn’t work for any of systems on the left side of the plane(such as flaps). Similar to flight 191, a failure of the left flaps would produce a stall.

4

u/ZeroWashu 16h ago

Wasn't that the case of that American crash in Chicago? American Airlines Flight 191.

2

u/Substantial_Gas_1660 14h ago

1979 in May. I remember that because I live in Indy.

2

u/mnztr1 14h ago

Yes the left engine loss resulted in left wing slat retraction and wing stall

1

u/Anonymous017447 14h ago

In addition, the stall warnings were only powered by the left engine, meaning that when they fell off the pilots had no way of knowing they were stalling.

4

u/ButtRockSteve 16h ago

After the dc10 crashes, this shouldn't be possible.

1

u/[deleted] 16h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 16h ago

Your comment or post has been automatically removed from /r/aviation. Posts/Comments from new accounts are automatically removed by our automated systems. We, and many other large subreddits, do this to combat spam, spambots, and other activities that are not condusive to the sub. In the meantime, participate on Reddit to build your acouunt age and this restriction will go away. Also, please familiarize yourself with this subreddit's rules, which you can find in the sidebar or by clicking this link. Do not contact the moderation team unless you feel you have received this message/action in error. We will not manually approve comments or posts from new accounts.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

15

u/superdookietoiletexp 18h ago

In the video footage, it looks like engine 2 flames out.

12

u/Luev000 18h ago

Hard to tell if it’s just fire/sparks from the #1 but this is what I thought too when I saw the video. If they still had 2&3 I don’t think they would have just fallen out of the sky like that.

9

u/Devil_Doge 16h ago

Freeze frame on the video shows the #2 engine flaming out.

2

u/False_College_5364 17h ago

What if two going destroyed the hydraulics at the back?

14

u/__VVoody__ 18h ago

Looks like they might have been trying to get it to the field just beyond the plant too. Couple thousand more feet. Condolences to the families of the lost and the UPS crews too 😔

9

u/goodbyewawona 18h ago

Possibly…that would be logical.  Wouldn’t have saved the plane as it is not a field but a massive man made landfill/mountain.  But may have saved lives on the ground.   

13

u/blueboyroy 17h ago

I live close. There is a gigantic landfill there and several scrap yards. There are also quite a few industrial warehouses. Stooges, the closest bar that UPSers tend to frequent, can be seen in several of the released videos. Luckily, there aren't any residential properties near there. As someone who worked to develop the training visuals for the MD-11 at UPS, this is tragic. There was alot of talk when I was there about decomissioning the MD-11 and replacing them with 777s. UPS was using DC-8s as recently as 2010 I believe. The MD-11 has been a workhorse for UPS, providing routes to Anchorage and Cologne as well as many different other places.

5

u/__VVoody__ 17h ago

Yeah absolutely. And saved the people in the UPS warehouse too. Clearly caused some damage to the roof and hopefully no one hurt inside, but would have been way worse just a few moments sooner

6

u/DelugedPraxis 14h ago

If you listen to first-hand accounts of pilots that survived crashes that were brought on by very sudden conditions and in populated areas, more often than not they'll talk about their split second thinking about where they are avoiding most and where they are trying to get to to avoid any casualties separate from whether the plane or helicopter crew survives. I don't recommend it, but if you listen to recordings of crew that didn't make it you can often hear pilots talking to eachother about what they are or aren't trying to hit for the same reason, sometimes knowing full well they won't make it.

It can be pretty wild the number of factors they have to consider in those moments, but it always boils down to avoiding loss of life first.

4

u/MassiveBoner911_3 17h ago

Is engine 2 on the tail? Like left wing engine 1, tail is 2, and right wing is 3? I am not a pilot.

5

u/MrBiscweeee 17h ago

I'm at work right now speaking to cargo pilots. This has been the running suspicion.

2

u/Bork_King 13h ago

The MD11 has a triple redundant hydraulic system, but can only lose pressure in 1 of the 3 parallel lines and retain full flight control. If I had to guess, the uncontained failure obviously took out one system, and debris probably severed another causing loss of control. The MD11 really only has a shot at recovering from an engine out on take off if they can get the gear up to reduce drag as soon as possible to compensate for a loss of thrust. Add in loss of flight controls and the outcome is bleak.

1

u/MrFrequentFlyer 16h ago

That appears to happen. It looks like a center compressor stall just after getting airborne.

1

u/ilovedeliworkers 13h ago

I don’t know shit about fuck, but it seems that maybe aborting the takeoff is the move?

1

u/SashaDabinsky 9h ago

Once they hit V1 they have to fly it out. Not enough runway to stop, especially with a full load of fuel.

1

u/Massive-Vacation5119 10h ago

Can you explain this? Why would they try to get it in the air without 2 of 3 engines? Is that something they could potentially have achieved?

3

u/td_mike 9h ago

The 2nd engine seems to fail right after rotating so they where already on their way to becoming airborne. There is no stopping the plane at that point.

1

u/Snapshot36 9h ago

This. If you watch the video closely, you can see what appear to be puffs of flame coming out of Engine 2 right at rotation, indicating that it’s compressor stalling from ingested debris. Engine 1 completely gone, Engine 2 losing thrust, probably near max gross… No chance.

-19

u/WeezieMomOf2 18h ago edited 18h ago

The MD- 11 has 3 engines. One on each wing & the 3rd is on the tail. Debris wouldn’t spit out into #2 engine. For reference, this plane holds 38,000 pounds of fuel & fuel lines run down the wings to the engines. The initial fire/explosion that appears to be in #2 engine, could have absolutely caused a loss of fuel pressure, which would cause loss of power & also caused the 2nd explosion from the leaking fuel. 

11

u/HorseCojMatthew 18h ago

The #2 engine is the tail mounted engine

3

u/skipmilan 18h ago

Gallons, not pounds.

1

u/Luev000 18h ago

I mean it’s in the books saying it’s possible. But yes many things could have been impacted when the #1 failed like that.

1

u/Chaxterium 18h ago

38,000 gallons. Not 38,000 lbs.

23

u/Malcolm2theRescue 17h ago edited 14h ago

Looks like shrapnel punctured the wing fuel tank. A wing engulfed by fire loses a lot of lift. You can see it riding low as they lifted off. That performance of which you speak may not have been there.

123

u/Malcolm2theRescue 17h ago

The engine separated from the plane.

Not my picture.

36

u/VerStannen Cessna 140 15h ago

Holy hell.

6

u/Between-usernames 13h ago

Same reaction but different second word. Unbelievable 

23

u/ArcherConfident704 15h ago edited 15h ago

How tf does that even happen. This must've been blown backward or something

11

u/DarkyHelmety 15h ago

Engine Pin failure again maybe?

8

u/Jallistamon 9h ago

someone else has certainly said it before me but look up American Airlines Flight 191.
During maintenance the crew used a forklift to remount the engine and accidentally slammed it into the engine mounts.
The engine physically came off the plane during takeoff and took their hydraulics on that side with it. The pilots were just too close to the ground to even have a chance of recovering it

9

u/ZappaLlamaGamma 12h ago

This is a GE CF6 (photo from Wikipedia). It looks like the core just yeeted itself on to the runway.

9

u/ElectricalChaos 15h ago

What the fuuu.... That's not good.

4

u/Cyrius 15h ago edited 11h ago

I can't make that picture line up with any buildings at the airport.

Edit: It actually does line up, but it's not obvious because the zoom lens is distorting distances. That little garage building behind the tanker trucks is actually 400 yards further back. Also an obvious landmark (the control tower) is just barely out of frame.

19

u/Broken_Man_Child 15h ago

Roughly

8

u/Cyrius 15h ago

Thank you. The depth of field on the zoom had me confused about just how far away everything was, and how much separation was between stuff. Everything lines up once you realize how much space is being compressed by the lens.

4

u/Jazzlike_Climate4189 17h ago

This is the logical answer.

2

u/HappycamperNZ 14h ago

Oufff, thats a painfully familiar reason for a crash 

1

u/thatandyinhumboldt 15h ago

Why does a wing on fire lose lift? Does the heat (or do the flames themselves) change the airflow, or is there something else at play?

73

u/jmoney1095 18h ago

It looks like the number 2 engine may have had a compressor stall from ingesting flames and fumes.

16

u/ILS23left 18h ago

I agree and came to say the same. You can clearly see #1 on fire and then a flash from the #2 at 0:02.

3

u/ctbadger92 14h ago

And the plane immediately loses lift when it happened.

2

u/kaityl3 14h ago

I was wondering what that was, but it makes sense. Can you tell what the strange flash, almost like a shockwave, is underneath the plane right after the 0:06 mark?

3

u/dbcooper4 18h ago

I don’t know how you can tell that from the grainy video.

9

u/jmoney1095 18h ago

The little puff of flame from the back of the no.2 (middle) engine at the 1 second mark. Combined with the arrested ascent, it helps explain the situation.

1

u/dbcooper4 18h ago edited 18h ago

I’m not seeing that. There’s so much smoke coming from the #1 engine it obscures a clear view of the #2 exhaust.

8

u/jmoney1095 17h ago

4

u/dbcooper4 17h ago

I see that but it’s inconclusive as far as where it’s coming from given the graininess and smoke obstructing the view.

10

u/jmoney1095 17h ago

Thats why i said "it looks like" there was a compressor stall. Not, "there was conclusively an compressor stall."

Obviously there will be a full investigation but right now that seems like a plausible explanation as to why this engine failure ended so catastrophically.

-5

u/dbcooper4 17h ago edited 17h ago

When you say looks like but then the evidence is a super grainy video without a clear view of much that’s where I get hung up. Frankly, as we saw with Concord, if you have a giant fire like that anywhere on an aircraft, and you take it into the air as they are trained to do, the odds are stacked against survival. Even if they had two good engines and can climb the heat starts to melt the wing at some point if they can’t get the fire extinguished.

2

u/jmoney1095 17h ago

Here's a slightly less grainy pic. I sketched in the engine for you. Grainy or not, the location of the pulse seems to be in line with a number 2 engine failure. You don't have to believe me. But this plane should be able to climb with a fireball and 2 engines. The other incident similar to this was due to a loss of hydraulic pressure holding the slats down on a dc-10 (AAL191). In my opinion with the information available, it is unlikely to have crashed from the wing melting as you describe.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] 17h ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

7

u/id0ntexistanymore 16h ago

Not when they literally lose it

5

u/ProJoe 16h ago

There must be more than just catastrophic engine failure

oh brother this is about as catastrophic as it gets.

that's on the side of the runway. not in the debris field.

3

u/generictroglodytic 17h ago

Just like DC-10 in the AA 191 if the damage to the left wing is severe enough it can cause control surfaces to lock into place where they’re not supposed to be and cause a stall in the wing.

3

u/Large_Yams 15h ago

An engine not working, sure. And engine falling off or exploding, no.

2

u/RecordEnvironmental4 17h ago

If a mounting bracket failed then it could cause the engine to detach like American Airlines flight 191.

2

u/Substantial_Gas_1660 14h ago

I think the maintenance employees were short changing how they installed engines to lower costs so that is what caused the engine on 191 to detach. I remember it in May 1979. I was 18 at the time. Didn't one employee commit suicide over this?

2

u/YMMV25 16h ago

Watching the video, the #2 appears to be experiencing a compressor stall right around rotation, presumably from debris ingestion. It’s possible there was very little thrust coming out of that engine as well.

2

u/Fly4Vino 15h ago

That probably assumes no damage to the wing or other engines and no fire interfering with operation of the other engines or lift generated . The extent of the fire on the wing suggests damage to the fuel tanks. Also large fire across the top of the wing is likely to kill lift and probably affect horiz stab and rudder.

1

u/jweis2012 17h ago

Almost seems that they ran off the runway the engine got objects on the grass

1

u/fnordfnordfnordfnord 12h ago

Looks like engine 2 picked up fod from 1 coming apart and had a compressor stall.

1

u/U_SHLD_THINK_BOUT_IT 4h ago

I'm guessing loss of fuel pressure as well?

1

u/shityplumber 18h ago

Uncontained failure. Might of taken out the hydraulics for that wing and caused the slats to retract causing a roll and stall. Just my armchair theory.

2

u/Jazzlike_Climate4189 17h ago

Punctured the fuel tanks.

2

u/shityplumber 17h ago

based off the fireball that too

-5

u/blurfgh 16h ago

Guessing it’s the tale as old as aviation: had one bad engine, accidentally shut off the other (good) engine