UPS MD-11 crash at SDF

MikeD said:
I believe that’s where it came from. They were at something like V2+12 or so (I don’t remember the exact, but that’s close), and the jet was flying fine. The crew had no idea they were instant test pilots at that time, sadly. The training was to slow back to V2, for climb performance and/or obstacle/terrain clearance I imagine, but that did them in.

Me personally, in the jets I’ve flown….mostly being power-deficient ones compared to weight…. on a single engine Go, we were always trained that speed is life, get as much as you can and keep it in the bank to use as you come back around to land. Never give it up unless its needed. Especially if it’s VMC and terrain/obstacle avoidance visually isn’t an issue.
Click to expand...

To add, as my airframes go, A-10, seriously thrust deficient. 117, thrust deficient but not as bad. T-38, same. 737-200, seriously thrust deficient….and was demonstrated by the one that ditched just shy of HNL after a loss of thrust on takeoff. Hence where the above mindset was created from.
 
MikeD said:
To add, as my airframes go, A-10, seriously thrust deficient. 117, thrust deficient but not as bad. T-38, same. 737-200, seriously thrust deficient….and was demonstrated by the one that ditched just shy of HNL after a loss of thrust on takeoff. Hence where the above mindset was created from.
Click to expand...
wasn’t the main problem with the -200 in HNL that they reduced the good engine?
 
Roger Roger said:
wasn’t the main problem with the -200 in HNL that they reduced the good engine?
Click to expand...

That and they overtemped either it or the other, I believe. But those old JT8s made a single engine initial takeoff or heavy go around one heck of a sporty experience, one where likely use of ground effect might even have to come into play, obstacles allowing. There just isn’t that extra insurance that the CFMs provide.
 
MikeD said:
That and they overtemped either it or the other, I believe. But those old JT8s made a single engine initial takeoff or heavy go around one heck of a sporty experience, one where likely use of ground effect might even have to come into play, obstacles allowing. There just isn’t that extra insurance that the CFMs provide.
Click to expand...
well, iirc practically every engine in their fleet, once they started looking into the operator, was performing below spec due to wear and damage. But I seem to remember they still would have been fine if they had throttled up the operating engine. Boxes tend to be pretty light and it’s not like they had a lot of fuel.

But back to this, once you’re in “engine is off the airplane” territory the possible collateral damage makes it look like this crew got the proverbial kobayashi maru scenario. Just sucks.
 
Significant HAZMAT event at GFL Environmental.
They're a Special Waste recycler off the end of the runway.
Seems to be the focus right now.

that explains the secondaries.
 
According to ADS-B data the aircraft had flown-in from BWI a few hours prior. It flew SDF-BWI that morning. So this was not the first flight after heavy maintenance.
 
DropTank said:
5 mile radius "shelter in place"
Please use extreme caution
Click to expand...

They've been sending out cell phone warnings since right after the crash, I would imagine long before there was any information about potential hazmat problems. With any luck this is just local/state gummint being cautious. Haven't seen any smoke here (~6 miles N of the crash site).
 
Boris Badenov said:
They've been sending out cell phone warnings since right after the crash, I would imagine long before there was any information about potential hazmat problems. With any luck this is just local/state gummint being cautious. Haven't seen any smoke here (~6 miles N of the crash site).
Click to expand...

Possibly.
No significant HAZMAT cargo on the aircraft
Shelter in placed reduced to 1 mile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top