Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
UPS Plane Crash
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="worldwide" data-source="post: 1193864" data-attributes="member: 2193"><p>Incorrect. Using the data of Ascend London insurance consultancy, the MD-11 is #10 of the "most dangerous" aircraft on the basis of the air crash quantity with fatal outcome. The # 1 "most dangerous" aircraft (based purely on # of fatalities) is the Boeing 737 JT8D. # 2 and 3 are Russian aircraft, # 4 is the Airbus A310. Many Russian aircraft are sold to third world countries and pilot skill level is often not at Western standards. So, this study is flawed as it simply looks at passengers killed and not the reason for the crash. Most crashes happen due to pilot error and other flaws versus strictly mechanical issues (i.e. weather, ATC, etc.). Some planes are inherently more challenging to fly so an inexperienced crew may have issues with the aircraft while a more seasoned crew would not.</p></blockquote><p>UPS is notoriously cheap when they spec aircraft. Their Boeing 767s are the most Spartan cargo versions ever built.[/QUOTE]</p><p></p><p>So by "notoriously cheap" you have data and links to back this up since being notorious is "publicly or generally known", there must be a wealth of information on this. How are UPS 767's outfitted tht differ from other cargo operators of 767's (not counting the brand new 767's that Fedex is getting to replace their ancient MD-10's?</p><p></p><p>Just this year, UPS spent millions by adding winglets to all 767's to increase the overall efficiency of the aircraft, saving fuel by reducing drag while also lowering noise emissions by improving take-off performance. Is that the "notoriously cheap" part you mentioned?</p><p></p><p>[/QUOTE]I don't know how the A300-600 was equipped.[/QUOTE]</p><p></p><p>And yet just a few sentences ago you said that "Their Boeing 767s are the most Spartan cargo versions ever built." So which is it?</p><p></p><p>[/QUOTE]Nobody knows what happened yet, but we do know that both UPS and FedEx will do almost anything to save time (and money), and flying a "hurry-up" approach into an airport with known terrain issues is both dangerous and foolhardy. It increasingly looks like they struck trees and/or terrain and that engines and everything else were fully functional.[/QUOTE]</p><p></p><p>So nobody knows what happened but you infer UPS somehow made the pilots perform this "hurry-up" approach? There are standard approach paths to every airport that Fedex, UPS and all major airlines use. The pilot in command is just that - the decisions the flight crew makes are their own. Did the UPS pilots follow the standard approach path for this particular runway on the morning of the accident? Time will tell. The pilots acknowledged that they had the airport in sight, the conditions were VFR but the aircraft struck trees nearly 3/4 of a mile from the end of the runway.</p><p></p><p>Regardless of the reasons, it was a tragic accident. Let's wait for the actual facts of the case to reveal themselves as opposed to using your "facts."</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="worldwide, post: 1193864, member: 2193"] Incorrect. Using the data of Ascend London insurance consultancy, the MD-11 is #10 of the "most dangerous" aircraft on the basis of the air crash quantity with fatal outcome. The # 1 "most dangerous" aircraft (based purely on # of fatalities) is the Boeing 737 JT8D. # 2 and 3 are Russian aircraft, # 4 is the Airbus A310. Many Russian aircraft are sold to third world countries and pilot skill level is often not at Western standards. So, this study is flawed as it simply looks at passengers killed and not the reason for the crash. Most crashes happen due to pilot error and other flaws versus strictly mechanical issues (i.e. weather, ATC, etc.). Some planes are inherently more challenging to fly so an inexperienced crew may have issues with the aircraft while a more seasoned crew would not. [/QUOTE]UPS is notoriously cheap when they spec aircraft. Their Boeing 767s are the most Spartan cargo versions ever built.[/QUOTE] So by "notoriously cheap" you have data and links to back this up since being notorious is "publicly or generally known", there must be a wealth of information on this. How are UPS 767's outfitted tht differ from other cargo operators of 767's (not counting the brand new 767's that Fedex is getting to replace their ancient MD-10's? Just this year, UPS spent millions by adding winglets to all 767's to increase the overall efficiency of the aircraft, saving fuel by reducing drag while also lowering noise emissions by improving take-off performance. Is that the "notoriously cheap" part you mentioned? [/QUOTE]I don't know how the A300-600 was equipped.[/QUOTE] And yet just a few sentences ago you said that "Their Boeing 767s are the most Spartan cargo versions ever built." So which is it? [/QUOTE]Nobody knows what happened yet, but we do know that both UPS and FedEx will do almost anything to save time (and money), and flying a "hurry-up" approach into an airport with known terrain issues is both dangerous and foolhardy. It increasingly looks like they struck trees and/or terrain and that engines and everything else were fully functional.[/QUOTE] So nobody knows what happened but you infer UPS somehow made the pilots perform this "hurry-up" approach? There are standard approach paths to every airport that Fedex, UPS and all major airlines use. The pilot in command is just that - the decisions the flight crew makes are their own. Did the UPS pilots follow the standard approach path for this particular runway on the morning of the accident? Time will tell. The pilots acknowledged that they had the airport in sight, the conditions were VFR but the aircraft struck trees nearly 3/4 of a mile from the end of the runway. Regardless of the reasons, it was a tragic accident. Let's wait for the actual facts of the case to reveal themselves as opposed to using your "facts." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
UPS Plane Crash
Top