UPS MD-11 crash at SDF

[MikeD]

That pic shows the fire continued “in the area of the left option attachment.”



I’m not aware of any commercial jetliner that took off, the wing caught fire, and the plane safely landed back. Are there any examples? I would assume a wing on fire, especially near a pylon area with fuel lines, is basically a doomed situation.

Prelim report link:

https://www.ntsb.gov/Documents/Prelimiary%20Report%20DCA26MA024.pdf

None that i know of off the top of my head, and even so, it wouldn’t be a situation where there’s time for checklists to be run before immediately returning to land. And that’s even assuming that the crew could even be aware of the intensity and size of such a fire in/on a wing. Just a terrible set of circumstances.

I don’t understand why this report wouldn’t address what the number 2 engine was doing, and maybe even a little more information on the speed the aircraft attained. I can understand not putting the crew actions in a preliminary report. Every pilot however is asking those first two questions.

Likely not fully analyzed and/or correlated from the FDR yet, to make a proper info release on it at this time. Moreso the engine complexities going at the time, vice the speeds attained.

 

[Roger Roger]

Not only that, looking at the pictures of the fractures of the pylon mount, it would have been obvious that there was a significant issue and would have been noted by the most junior A&P out there...in an instant.

Big yikes.

 

[A300Capt]

That pic shows the fire continued “in the area of the left option attachment.”



I’m not aware of any commercial jetliner that took off, the wing caught fire, and the plane safely landed back. Are there any examples? I would assume a wing on fire, especially near a pylon area with fuel lines, is basically a doomed situation.

Prelim report link:

https://www.ntsb.gov/Documents/Prelimiary%20Report%20DCA26MA024.pdf

They made it back on the ground…


View: https://youtu.be/tcRxa6E1MUw

 

[Maurus]

Kudos to them, I agree in principle, but it feels like if they had released this video immediately, the 3 airlines here would have grounded the MD11 immediately too. Instead of the 3-4 day wait.

Sadly it has been demonstrated by the FAA and cargo industry that less safety is ok if cargo needs to move. I honestly think they would have kept flying.

 

[A300Capt]

On AA191 after the engine & pylon separated, the outboard slats retracted, causing the wing to stall and aircraft to roll. As @MikeD said, climb performance remains if only #1 is lost, so something else caused the loss of power and left roll.

Climb performance at their weight should’ve been more than sufficient with the loss of just engine #1 (or any single engine failure). Their pitch attitude looks good in the pics for a normal or engine out takeoff. In fact…it looks perfectly executed. I suspect #2 FOD’ed and was also severely compromised by #1 gyroscopically flipping over the top of the fuselage and most likely spewing shrapnel and heated fluids into #2’s intake (hence the compressor stalls). With two engines out and the weight they were at when the failure occurred, they were simply handed a unsurvivable • sandwich. We won’t even get into secondary flight control failures.

Maybe, just maybe, if the left main gear had not contacted the south building (probably why it started rolling left), maybe if they were flying a flight where the t/o gross weight had been much less, maybe had the second engine not been compromised or simply regained more power…..who knows? It was an absolutely worse case scenario that’s not trained for.

 

[///AMG]

That pic shows the fire continued “in the area of the left option attachment.”



I’m not aware of any commercial jetliner that took off, the wing caught fire, and the plane safely landed back. Are there any examples? I would assume a wing on fire, especially near a pylon area with fuel lines, is basically a doomed situation.

Prelim report link:

https://www.ntsb.gov/Documents/Prelimiary%20Report%20DCA26MA024.pdf

Yeah, also from these pictures and previous video, that the fire root appears to be on the top of the wing, somewhere just aft of the leading edge. So I'm wondering if the pylon/engine made contact there on its way up/aft and then lit the fuel plume. Very much seems on par with the massive fuel leak/fire that doomed Concorde. I'm guessing structural failure wouldn't have taken long in this scenario, even if they had managed to climb away. Seems like too big of a fire to simply blow out by accelerating and climbing higher

 

[arkavgal]

As bad as those videos were the still picture series this morning just seems worse to me, oddly.

Yeah, I agree. I almost wish I hadn't seen that. It's truly horrific.

 

[Skåning]

Kinda looks like the fire behind the winglet is coming out of engine #2, is that what a compressor stall would look like?

 

[MikeD]

Kinda looks like the fire behind the winglet is coming out of engine #2, is that what a compressor stall would look like?

View attachment 86831

Compressor stalls would flame from the inlet as well as the exhaust, and appear as cough-looking smoke or flame. This amount of fire could also be internal FOD damage. Engine tear down would reveal which, or both possibly.

Jet engines as we know, convert cold air to hot air. With flames and superheated air going into the intake already, there was likely stall and resultant very depleted thrust being made out the back end .

 

[HeyEng]

Actually, that's the whole question: If #2 was operating normally, I think the aircraft would be flyable. In fact, you could argue that they did fly it. We have an engine "...separation" checklist on my fleet. The engine is near enough to the CG that while there would be a CG shift, I'd guess it's still controllable. On the other hand, you aren't climbing with a dual engine failure.

It may have been "flyable" but with it burning as it was, probably not for very long. In addition to the fire, the likelihood of damaged flight controls, loss of hydraulics, etc. Of course, this is just my armchair QBing here and is worth every cent you paid for it.

 

[DE727UPS]

I'm guessing structural failure wouldn't have taken long in this scenario, even if they had managed to climb away. Seems like too big of a fire to simply blow out by accelerating and climbing higher

Agree but possibly if they pulled the fire handle and shut off flow to the pylon it would have put the fire out if it was being fed by a fuel line. They weren't in the air long enough to assess the situation. I think they had a fire warning on the CVR after V1. I remember being taught to "not touch anything" until 400 feet and it was acceptable to "let it burn" (an engine fire) until after the flaps were up. Last part of that paragraph was that the crew can take any action to meet the needs of the emergency (paraphrasing). Had they known what was going on they would have pulled the fire handle. No way to see back there from the cockpit.

 

[MikeD]

Agree but possibly if they pulled the fire handle and shut off flow to the pylon it would have put the fire out if it was being fed by a fuel line. They weren't in the air long enough to assess the situation. I think they had a fire warning on the CVR after V1. I remember being taught to "not touch anything" until 400 feet and it was acceptable to "let it burn" until after the flaps were up. Last part of that paragraph was that the crew can take any action to meet the needs of the emergency (paraphrasing). Had they known what was going on they would have pulled the fire handle. No way to see back there from the cockpit.

And the “do nothing until 400 / let it burn” predicated on the situation being a contained engine fire itself. Not a separated engine and pylon with upstream fluid line damage of unknown degree, and subsequent ignition of the wing area. Unfortunately, a cascading set of circumstances that cannot be planned for or effectively trained to.

 

[HeyEng]

Agree but possibly if they pulled the fire handle and shut off flow to the pylon it would have put the fire out if it was being fed by a fuel line. They weren't in the air long enough to assess the situation. I think they had a fire warning on the CVR after V1. I remember being taught to "not touch anything" until 400 feet and it was acceptable to "let it burn" (an engine fire) until after the flaps were up. Last part of that paragraph was that the crew can take any action to meet the needs of the emergency (paraphrasing). Had they known what was going on they would have pulled the fire handle. No way to see back there from the cockpit.

Even if they had pulled the handle (unlikely at this point the flight from reading other posts), I don't think that would have done much of anything. I'm *guessing* (and just a guess) that the wing/fuel tank had been compromised and just closing the fuel SOV would have done nothing.

 

[HeyEng]

And the “do nothing until 400 / let it burn” predicated on the situation being a contained engine fire itself. Not a separated engine and pylon with upstream fluid line damage of unknown degree, and subsequent ignition of the wing area. Unfortunately, a cascading set of circumstances that cannot be planned for or effectively trained to.

And I would assume that they had no idea that the engine/pylon had separated from the airplane. I haven't looked at the SOE, but I think it was mere seconds from engine separation until the contact with the building. Simply no time to "figure out" what was happening.

 

[MikeD]

And I would assume that they had no idea that the engine/pylon had separated from the airplane. I haven't looked at the SOE, but I think it was mere seconds from engine separation until the contact with the building. Simply no time to "figure out" what was happening.

Agreed. As @DE727UPS said above, no way to see the wing area there visually. And agree on the lack of time in the thrust deficient situation. Some places online were praising the crew for putting the jet down in the junkyard. Not to take anything away from the crew and what they tried to do, but in this thrust deficient situation, I think they may have had no say in the matter and were along for the ride of wherever the jet was going to settle into on its own, sadly,

 

[Roger Roger]

Even if they had pulled the handle (unlikely at this point the flight from reading other posts), I don't think that would have much of anything. I'm *guessing* (and just a guess) that the wing/fuel tank had been compromised and just closing the fuel SOV would have done nothing.

wonder where the SOV is physically located.

 

[Roger Roger]

And the “do nothing until 400 / let it burn” predicated on the situation being a contained engine fire itself. Not a separated engine and pylon with upstream fluid line damage of unknown degree, and subsequent ignition of the wing area. Unfortunately, a cascading set of circumstances that cannot be planned for or effectively trained to.

Truly the Kobayashi Maru scenario.

 

[HeyEng]

The plane came out of C check just a couple weeks before the accident. UPS used a vendor for this.

So wondering what was actually looked at/inspected at this C check; reading from the prelim, "A 24-month/4,800 hour lubrication task of the pylon thrustlinks and pylon spherical bearings was last accomplished on October 18, 2025." This seems to indicate *just* a lubrication and not a detailed inspection of the components. Again, I don't know what is on those inspection cards, but if it was just a lubrication, then any cracks could have just been missed.

 

[MikeD]

Truly the Kobayashi Maru scenario.

Indeed, if a situation can truly meet that definition, this would be it.

 

[🦈💜]

I think even if #2 wasn't FOD'd out (or compressor stalled), the fate of that airplane was sealed. It wasn't going to fly anymore.

My read from those images is that this was immediately unsurvivable. The leading edge damage, the wing fire ... you can see an uncommanded left roll developing immediately.

Doesn't matter if anything got FODded or if the engine hit anything (my read based on the image sequence is that it probably didn't).