Live data from Hacker News

UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

avherald.com

331–340 of 469 posts

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#331

This really reminded me of a colleague who had a part-time night job flying cancelled checks from Centennial Airport (KAPA, south of Denver) to SLC. A bunch of us went out to lunch on a Friday in December 2005. That night, on his return to KAPA, he crashed his Mitsubishi MU-2 about a mile short of the runway. He and his co-pilot were gone, just like that. On Monday you could see the wreckage and cleanup from our offi…

KAPA is a beautiful airport too, and its restaurant "Perfect Landing" on the second floor is S-tier. I've never heard about this case there, though. Do you have a flight number?

I don't have a flight number, but here's an archived news article of the incident. https://www.deseret.com/2004/12/13/19866420/model-of-plane-t...

Oh I guess it was 2004, not 2005.

Yes, Perfect Landing is a great restaurant!

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#332
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> abort safely That's what I'm getting at. I want to abort unsafely. Imagine 400 meters of grass field after the end of the runway, and a water body. I'm asking wether such factors are accounted for, or if plane on ground beyond runway does-not-compute.

You should never plan to use your safety margin! That "extra" 400m of grass? That's for all the other things that can still go wrong even when you follow procedure. e.g., you're below V1 so you abort takeoff, close throttles and hit the brakes. You should be able to safely stop on the runway. But now your brakes fail because maybe the reason you had to abort was a fire that also managed to burn through your brake lin…

[deleted]

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#333
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None? Nobody puts airports inside city centers and metro areas don’t just have dense urban housing. The common solution in many land strapped cities is for airports to rout aircraft over water often by building airports on reclaimed land. What generally gets areas in trouble is locations that used to be a good get worse as aircraft get larger and the surroundings get built up. The solution is to send larger airplanes…

San Jose does. You can, in theory, walk to downtown from the airport; it's about an hour and a half via pedestrian trail: https://maps.app.goo.gl/zhZdA5tWGAKunM2e8 (This is widely considered a misfeature of San Jose - it limits the height of buildings in downtown San Jose to 10 stories because the downtown is directly under the flight path of arriving flights, it limits runway length and airport expansion, and it mea…

The Las Vegas Airport is very close to the strip, surrounded by residential neighborhoods and hotels about 1/4 - 1/2 mile from the airport, and UNLV university is about 1000 feet in a straight line from one of the runways.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#334
post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Ohio River is a large body of water fairly close if someone was going to relocate Louisville airport.

The Ohio River is a mile wide at Louisville, but that still doesn't wide enough to classify it "large body of water", especially because it is a river that moves relatively quick for its width and then hits falls/rapids just downstream of Louisville. But also there's a lot of urban and suburban development you'd have to displace to even consider moving the airport near the Ohio River for most miles both up and down s…

It's not even a mile wide here. The widest spot I measured just east of the falls was 0.75, at Utica it is 0.34 and at Westport it's 0.39.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#335
post #27

This is probably the worst way a plane could go down in terms of damage caused. Maximum effect in term of damage. Cargo plane apparently reached V1 (go/no go speed) on the runway, and suffered a catastrophic engine failure. They passed V1, so they knew they were going down. Engine was shedding large debris, including the housing (!!!) which is a shrapnel shield. They were on fire just as they reached V1. Plane was fu…

>> highway and warehouses at the end of the runway It's astonishing that this is a thing. Why aren't we building airports with enough space for a plane to remain on the ground and have plenty of room to decelerate in this situation? I can understand why it can't be retro fitted to existing airports but is it a scenario that's considered at new airports? Just seems like such an absolutely basic safety step.

> Why aren't we building airports with enough space for a plane to remain on the ground and have plenty of room to decelerate in this situation?

But that's exactly what a runway is? They're extremely long, have ample safety margins, and have "protected areas" extending out on either end, and outside of that there are regulations about what can and can't be built along the extendend runway centerlines. But jetliners are huge, heavy, fast, and designed to go long distances - the stopping distance of a fully loaded jet at full takeoff speed is measured in miles.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#336
It does make me wonder: why are aircraft takeoffs and landings not recorded more often, with higher quality cameras and more angles? If I can watch an NFL replay in 4k a few seconds after the ball is snapped, why not record (and overwrite) all flights that take off and land at every airport?

Like a dash cam, they can save the footage only if there is a problem. Surely that would be much better than splicing together many third party camera recordings.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#337
post #27

This is probably the worst way a plane could go down in terms of damage caused. Maximum effect in term of damage. Cargo plane apparently reached V1 (go/no go speed) on the runway, and suffered a catastrophic engine failure. They passed V1, so they knew they were going down. Engine was shedding large debris, including the housing (!!!) which is a shrapnel shield. They were on fire just as they reached V1. Plane was fu…

It was around 250k gallons of fuel. Our CAD notes on the initial dispatch said 250k, one press briefing said 280k, and then it was changed to 220k which I think is the actual number.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#338
post #27

This is probably the worst way a plane could go down in terms of damage caused. Maximum effect in term of damage. Cargo plane apparently reached V1 (go/no go speed) on the runway, and suffered a catastrophic engine failure. They passed V1, so they knew they were going down. Engine was shedding large debris, including the housing (!!!) which is a shrapnel shield. They were on fire just as they reached V1. Plane was fu…

> Louisville is now a firestorm as a result. Let's leave that word to mean what it actually means. Louisville experienced a serious fire.

It's a few blocks of fire. I was on Tanker 4565 standing by as a backfill for units on scene. It's no where near "All of Louisville", that's a ridiculous thing to say.

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#339
post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airliners are hilariously safe. One of my favorite stats is that it’s the second safest form of transportation per passenger mile (elevators win).

Per passenger mile is arguably not the best denominator. People choose planes because they are going long distances. Consider whether a better denominator would be per passenger trips. A 10,000 mi trip halfway across the world could have the same weight as a 2 mi trip to the grocery store. Or per hour travelled. By these metrics commercial flying isn't as safe as you think.

except 10,000 miles by anything but air isn't a single trip, it'd be multiple trips and involve a boat so that's not really a fair comparison either.

Furthest you can go in a straight land on land is about 7000 miles :).

Re: UPS plane crashes near Louisville airport

#340
post #106

The AVHerald is usually the best source for these things, rather than MSM: https://avherald.com/h?article=52f5748f&opt=0 > Ground observers reported the aircraft had been delayed for about two hours for work on the left hand engine (engine #1), the engine #1 separated during the takeoff run, the center engine emitted streaks of flames, the aircraft impacted a UPS warehouse and ploughed through other facilities before…

This is likely relevant https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/11/airplane-maintenance... TDLR 10-20 years ago, the US started allowing maintenance of domestic planes in foreign countries, outside the reach of the FAA’s inspections

"TDLR 10-20 years ago, the US started allowing maintenance of domestic planes in foreign countries, outside the reach of the FAA’s inspections"

There are foreign planes entering US airspace every day, carrying thousands of passengers. They are also serviced by foreign technicians, outside the reach of the FAA's inspections, and they seem to be doing just fine.

"Foreign" in itself isn't bad, you just need to choose/require reputable partners. If you outsource your maintenance to the same crews that maintain jets for Polish LOT or Taiwanese China Airlines, you may save some money and yet get excellent service, as those airlines aren't known for having safety problems.

Kosovo or South Sudan would be a different story.

Post reply on HN