UPS Plane Crash

'Lord Brown's bidding'

Well-Known Member
While it is still early and just speculation, it is interesting to note in that airliners.net thread at least two posters suggest that the UPS pilots may have been 'hurrying to get the plane down', or a case of "Get-There-itis", based on analyzing the available data that has been released thus far. Sounds like they have a "production-problem" in the skies, as well......
-
 

'Lord Brown's bidding'

Well-Known Member
BTW, from what I can tell UPS Airlines has only had three 'hull-loss' (plane destroyed) incidents in their history-two with fatalities, including this one.

The first incident I actually witnessed (from a distance) and resulted in no fatalities. A DC-8 landing in Philly some years ago caught fire during its approach, filling the cockpit with smoke, but the two pilots got the plane on the ground safely. Shut the airport down for hours. This incident led to the restriction of shipping lithium batteries (as cargo) on passenger-flights, although ironically the same rule does not apply to cargo lines, although the incident happened on a cargo flight.

The 2nd hull-lost event was the plane crash in Dubai, which involved the first fatalities in the history of UPS airlines, and the only ones until last week. By comparison, Fed-Ex has had numerous incidents resulting a plane being declared a 'loss', including runway over-rans and a plane bouncing up in the air and landing on its back in Newark back in the 90's; one might think Fed-Ex has 2nd-class pilots (like their ground drivers), but they are the best paid in the world (much to the consternation of FedEx Express' not-as-well-treated "ground pil-" I mean delivery couriers; always want to call em pilots since they are classified as such and all). However, only the most recent incident-in 2009-resulted in fatalities of FedEx pilots; there was another crash with a single fatality in 2004, but the pilot was shuttling FedEx packages under contract in Alaska, using a Cessna.
 
Last edited:

oldngray

nowhere special
UPS bought a ton of old DC-8's a long time ago when they were really cheap. Most from an airline that went belly up I think but I can't remember which airline.
 

scratch

Least Best Moderator
Staff member
Ill-fated UPS jet was on autopilot seconds before crash

NTSB announces the plane was on autopilot.

UPS originally had a company called Ryan operate its first planes, I think it was Braniff that we bought a lot of the first planes when they went out of business. I had somebody tell me the planes had to have major work done on them to get them in good shape again.
 
Last edited:

edd_tv

Cardboard picker upper
Complete speculation, but it sounds eerily similar to the Asiana scenario a few weeks ago. Getting behind the airplane,letting George get you in a pickle.
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
BTW, from what I can tell UPS Airlines has only had three 'hull-loss' (plane destroyed) incidents in their history-two with fatalities, including this one.

The first incident I actually witnessed (from a distance) and resulted in no fatalities. A DC-8 landing in Philly some years ago caught fire during its approach, filling the cockpit with smoke, but the two pilots got the plane on the ground safely. Shut the airport down for hours. This incident led to the restriction of shipping lithium batteries (as cargo) on passenger-flights, although ironically the same rule does not apply to cargo lines, although the incident happened on a cargo flight.

The 2nd hull-lost event was the plane crash in Dubai, which involved the first fatalities in the history of UPS airlines, and the only ones until last week. By comparison, Fed-Ex has had numerous incidents resulting a plane being declared a 'loss', including runway over-rans and a plane bouncing up in the air and landing on its back in Newark back in the 90's; one might think Fed-Ex has 2nd-class pilots (like their ground drivers), but they are the best paid in the world (much to the consternation of FedEx Express' not-as-well-treated "ground pil-" I mean delivery couriers; always want to call em pilots since they are classified as such and all). However, only the most recent incident-in 2009-resulted in fatalities of FedEx pilots; there was another crash with a single fatality in 2004, but the pilot was shuttling FedEx packages under contract in Alaska, using a Cessna.

FedEx has lost numerous Cessna Caravans, but they are not counted as "FedEx" because non-FedEx employees fly them under contract for very small money compared to the "real" FedEx pilots. The accident is assigned to the FBO.These single-engine aircraft are often used for routes over mountainous terrain in bad weather, a recipe for problems. FedEx is too cheap to use the correct type of aircraft in this situation. Their only fatal accident was the MD11 rollover in Tokyo a couple years ago, but you are correct that they have written-off quite a few aircraft due to accidents. Another MD11 flipped at EWR and one went in the drink at Subic Bay. They have also lost 727s and DC10s due to accidents.
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
While it is still early and just speculation, it is interesting to note in that airliners.net thread at least two posters suggest that the UPS pilots may have been 'hurrying to get the plane down', or a case of "Get-There-itis", based on analyzing the available data that has been released thus far. Sounds like they have a "production-problem" in the skies, as well......
-

The investigation is finding some very strange things, as in UPS may have some explaining to do as to why their aircraft was making such a bizarre approach.
 

Capt Carl

New Member
This tragedy did not need to happen regardless of schedule or pilot rest etc. There is off the shelf technology that has been available for years that would have allowed these pilots to fly a full CAT I autopilot coupled ILS approach to that runway. UPS just won't put it on the aircraft. If you are interested go to http://www.esterline.com/Portals/17/Documents/en-us/AMC AEEC 2012 Anchorage.pdf for a full description of the system. This is a no brainer.
 

Capt Carl

New Member
This tragedy did not need to happen regardless of schedule or crew rest etc. There is off the shelf technology available for commercial aircraft like the A300 that would have allowed these pilots to fly a CAT I coupled ILS approach to that runway. Go to http://www.esterline.com/Portals/17/Documents/en-us/AMC AEEC 2012 Anchorage.pdf if you would like to read about this system. We would not be discussing this sad topic if UPS had equipped its aircraft with this readily available technology.
 

BigUnionGuy

Got the T-Shirt
This tragedy did not need to happen regardless of schedule or crew rest etc. There is off the shelf technology available for commercial aircraft like the A300 that would have allowed these pilots to fly a CAT I coupled ILS approach to that runway. Go to http://www.esterline.com/Portals/17/Documents/en-us/AMC AEEC 2012 Anchorage.pdf if you would like to read about this system. We would not be discussing this sad topic if UPS had equipped its aircraft with this readily available technology.

I haven't had a chance to read your link yet....

But "heard" some chatter, that this particular runway (not the main one) is not suitable for landing on auto-pilot.

Also.... that once the auto-pilot is engaged (for landing) that it cannot be reverted to manual ? (with this particular craft)


I know nothing about aircraft. Other than, which gate I am supposed to go to. Thanks.



​-Bug-
 

Johney

Well-Known Member
I haven't had a chance to read your link yet....

But "heard" some chatter, that this particular runway (not the main one) is not suitable for landing on auto-pilot.

Also.... that once the auto-pilot is engaged (for landing) that it cannot be reverted to manual ? (with this particular craft)


I know nothing about aircraft. Other than, which gate I am supposed to go to. Thanks.



​-Bug-
I saw an interview with a pilot who flies into that airport regularly and he said the same thing....it is not good to fly into here on autopilot.
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
While it is still early and just speculation, it is interesting to note in that airliners.net thread at least two posters suggest that the UPS pilots may have been 'hurrying to get the plane down', or a case of "Get-There-itis", based on analyzing the available data that has been released thus far. Sounds like they have a "production-problem" in the skies, as well......
-


I realize you preface this statement with speculation, but this is not something to speculate over. I managed our air-dangerous good compliance program for 3200 employees and I trained to be a commercial pilot and flew many years ago. If pilots take shortcuts, they can die and take others along with them. The statement sounds like an off-the-cuff remark that an insensitive few would make to bash UPS on production and has no place in speculation. Two people died. May they rest in peace. We should be cognizant of this.

The only way someone would know if they "were hurrying to get the plane down" was if it was stated on the flight recorder. If that was the case it would have been reported by now.

I hope this sentiment is nipped in the bud for the sake of these two souls and the peace of their families.
 

worldwide

Well-Known Member
Capt Carl,

The Published RNAV LPVs are only authorized at BIRMINGHAM-SHUTTLESWORTH INTL for runways 06/24 (RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 06, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 4). This runway was closed on the day of the UPS accident which is why the aircraft was landing on runway 18.

There are THREE landing descent angles associated with Rwy 18. The LOC VDA of 3.28, the RNAV (GPS) VDA (to LNAV mins) of 3.24, and the PAPI angle of 3.20. All different angles. All different sources. All different approach criteria and purpose. Which one was the crew using? That remains to be seen. They impacted almost 3/4 of a mile away from the end of the runway with the autopilot completely hooked up until impact. The why in regard to that will be interesting. They aircraft was landing under VFR conditions and not instrument conditions and the cockpit voice recorder has the crew indicating they had the runway in sight.

Sixteen seconds before the end of the recording, the pilots received the first of two "sink rate" warnings; thirteen seconds to the end, one crew member reported the runway was in sight. Nine seconds prior to the end, there are "sounds that are consistent with impact" all according to the NTSB.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...ps/navservices/gnss/approaches/media/LPVs.xls
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
This tragedy did not need to happen regardless of schedule or pilot rest etc. There is off the shelf technology that has been available for years that would have allowed these pilots to fly a full CAT I autopilot coupled ILS approach to that runway. UPS just won't put it on the aircraft. If you are interested go to http://www.esterline.com/Portals/17/Documents/en-us/AMC AEEC 2012 Anchorage.pdf for a full description of the system. This is a no brainer.

Saving money over lives...has a familiar ring to it.
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
I couldn't agree more with worldwide...

Every thing I have read about UPS technology is that UPS leads the airline industry. To take a tragedy like this and push comments about production and saving money is disgusting. Let the investigators, who are the experts, draw conclusions from the evidence.

BC has plenty of threads that you can go to to air your personal grievances with UPS & FDX.
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
Except in this case, the "solution" brought up by Capt Carl is not applicable in this case. Check the facts first before jumping to conclusions and making assumptions.

No jumping to conclusions. I'm just pointing out that safety often takes a back seat to saving money. FedEx also does "hurry-up" approaches. This where the captain turns around and asks you (in the jumpseat) if you get airsick easily, and then proceeds to dive as fast as they can because they need to make up time. The rest of the approach is "normal", and the only reason they can do it is because there is little traffic during the hours FedEx and UPS fly.

My comment uses the term "familiar ring" to it because FedEx operates the world's largest fleet of the one of the world's most dangerous aircraft, the MD11. Only the TU-154 gets lower marks for safety with a lot of pilots. The "Deathstar" (MD11) has killed a lot of pilots, but it's still in the air.

UPS is notoriously cheap when they spec aircraft. Their Boeing 767s are the most Spartan cargo versions ever built. I don't know how the A300-600 was equipped. 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.

For pilots, the #1 concern is finding out what happened so it never happens again. The first people who want the full story are UPS A300-600 "Bus" drivers.
 

kingOFchester

Well-Known Member
Almost all airplane accidents are a result of several failures/mistakes rather then just one cause.

My prediction is that it will be pilot error coupled with cost saving procedures/pressure from UPS.
 
Top