UPS MD-11 crash at SDF

About time. Would’ve expected this earlier just due to the nature of this accident and the amount of unknowns and why questions, with what has been both seen and the evidence left over. All of which cannot be yet answered for. Based on this, it’s absolute BS that a fleet grounding wasn’t done very shortly after the accident. Better late than never, but it may just be found that it was luck another accident didn’t occur. As IO / IIC, I would’ve been pushing for this first thing on this one.
 
Be interesting to hear what’s going on behind closed doors at Boeing. I imagine they aren’t thrilled to be having liability for an aircraft type they didn’t design or build themselves, but only inherited. Wouldn’t be surprised if they have no issue with MD-11s being grounded for good and probably scrapped, so they can offer up a real Boeing product for replacement.
 
DE727UPS said:
What's wrong with a new 76? I thought that was supposed to be the Mad Dog replacement. Of course it doesn't have range/payload to match but that's just job security for more IPA pilots. Everyone moves up the list. Ect...
Click to expand...
I'm just a line doofus, but it seems to me that our Betters, as ever (and you would know better than I about that), have been skating as close to the edge as they could re: replacement aircraft. And now they've really stepped in it. No rational replacement even on the horizon, let alone ordered, let alone deliverable. I guess maybe they can cover a lot of it with 76s that were supposed to be doing other things, but robbing Peter to pay Paul isn't a long-term strategy. But I'm looking through a fairly narrow window, here. Curious as to your thoughts.
 
Boris Badenov said:
I'm just a line doofus, but it seems to me that our Betters, as ever (and you would know better than I about that), have been skating as close to the edge as they could re: replacement aircraft. And now they've really stepped in it. No rational replacement even on the horizon, let alone ordered, let alone deliverable. I guess maybe they can cover a lot of it with 76s that were supposed to be doing other things, but robbing Peter to pay Paul isn't a long-term strategy. But I'm looking through a fairly narrow window, here. Curious as to your thoughts.
Click to expand...

Connie’s used airplane lot in Michigan is happy to help with all your fleet needs!
 
DE727UPS said:
What's wrong with a new 76? I thought that was supposed to be the Mad Dog replacement. Of course it doesn't have range/payload to match but that's just job security for more IPA pilots. Everyone moves up the list. Ect...
Click to expand...
Because it takes AT LEAST 1.5 to almost 2 767 to carry what an MD can carry and they don't have the range she does.

I may be biased, but I'm pretty convinced that there are few airplanes than can do the missions the MD-11 does. It's, by far, one of the most versatile airplanes I've ever encountered.
 
I have friends at other companies who were surprised to see our MD’s still flying after the accident. Mind boggling that it took 4 days to ground that fleet. I’m not surprised though. Our memos were calling it an “incident” when wx radar was picking up the smoke plume. Even if they don’t find anything on the rest of the fleet you got a peace of mind knowing that a defect isn’t one cycle away from becoming another accident.
 
DE727UPS said:
What's wrong with a new 76? I thought that was supposed to be the Mad Dog replacement. Of course it doesn't have range/payload to match but that's just job security for more IPA pilots. Everyone moves up the list. Ect...
Click to expand...
They haven’t had a sale on them yet.
ERfly said:
Because it takes AT LEAST 1.5 to almost 2 767 to carry what an MD can carry and they don't have the range she does.

I may be biased, but I'm pretty convinced that there are few airplanes than can do the missions the MD-11 does. It's, by far, one of the most versatile airplanes I've ever encountered.
Click to expand...
The airplane that may match up with what the MD can do is the 777. At Brown we’re so hell bent on not losing the space parking on the wings that the 777 isn’t an option. What they’re looking for is essentially an inefficient wide body and they’re not going to find one. Every airplane out there is going to be a wingspan issue for them.

In the end my uneducated guess is we’ll probably double down on 76’s. Instead of one MD some cities will get 2 76’s a night or some places will share an airplane. They’ll probably justify the extra headcount costs with a reduction in training costs due to having more of a similar type. It also gives the company more options when it comes to rescheduling and schedule optimization.

Either way they have a decision to make if they claim they’re retiring them when they say. After this accident I don’t think that timeline for retirement will slow down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top