Environmental Issues

[GATTACA!]

The plane supposedly only reached an altitude of 175 feet before going down. That it was banked almost 90 degrees is odd. A freight shift, total engine failure, a stall of one wing, a catastrophic mechanical failure? This will be an interesting crash investigation.

Probably a combo of several. The one engine was obviously blown but from the sounds of it that by itself shouldn't have been enough.

 

[Irish#1]

These things are inevitable in this economic "culture". You cannot keep chasing the last damm nickel in a money stream and not have moments of randomness become disasters. If you're not chasing the last damm nickel, you just might have enough safety redundancy or extra care that the catastrophe is avoided. ... but what-the-Hell, chase that damm nickel.

Need to wait until the FAA figures it out, but all carriers are required to have scheduled inspections and maintenance performed. It’s determined by number of hours in the sky and number of days past. No wiggle room.

This doesn’t mean something could be missed causing a failure, but it’s the reason incidents like this aren’t more common.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Probably a combo of several. The one engine was obviously blown but from the sounds of it that by itself shouldn't have been enough.

Looks like the engine went out after V1 where they're committed to takeoff. As you say, that in itself shouldn't have been enough to cause the crash, but it puts them so close to the edge that almost anything else, like damage to the flaps or a hiccup in the other engine leads to a disaster. That hard roll to the left immediately after takeoff screams stall on the left wing. Bad situation all around.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Reports are now saying the left engine fell off the plane, likely resulting in major damage to the wing. The plane was supposedly well above its required takeoff speed, but did little more than rotate the nose and barely clear the perimeter fence without ever gaining much altitude, then rolling onto its left side. That all strongly suggests major damage to the left wing resulting in little to no lift, despite its high speed.

 

[GATTACA!]

Reports are now saying the left engine fell off the plane, likely resulting in major damage to the wing. The plane was supposedly well above its required takeoff speed, but did little more than rotate the nose and barely clear the perimeter fence without ever gaining much altitude, then rolling onto its left side. That all strongly suggests major damage to the left wing resulting in little to no lift, despite its high speed.

That's insane

Poor fucking pilots.

 

[Irish#1]

Reports are now saying the left engine fell off the plane, likely resulting in major damage to the wing. The plane was supposedly well above its required takeoff speed, but did little more than rotate the nose and barely clear the perimeter fence without ever gaining much altitude, then rolling onto its left side. That all strongly suggests major damage to the left wing resulting in little to no lift, despite its high speed.

That’s crazy

 

[Irish#1]

The comment about the bolts caught my eye. We sell a lot of MRO supplies to a number of Aero maintenance companies. All fasteners have to meet specific specifications for alloy and strength. They also have to be labeled and identifiable by lot, manufacturer, date manufactured, etc. Trace ability is very important.

“If this engine did indeed come off prematurely, as it appears it did, then you’re going to be looking for the engine mounts. You’re going to be looking at the bolts themselves. All of those pieces need to be recovered and brought back in,” Soucie said.

“The maintenance will be the big issue — what exactly was done to the aircraft, who did it, what parts were replaced, what procedures were followed, and who inspected the work,” Schiavo said.

Investigators likely requested all maintenance and overhaul records for the plane before arriving, she said. The team will be particularly interested in any maintenance checks, in which engines or other parts may have been removed or replaced, she said.

It’s too soon to know for sure whether any maintenance issues impacted the crash, Muntean stressed on Wednesday. Some of the initial videos and images from the crash are revealing, though, Schiavo said.

The plane’s takeoff was not delayed, and no maintenance work was done immediately before the crash, according to UPS, Inman said. NTSB investigators will independently verify that and “will be going back and looking at every aspect of maintenance that was done on this plane,” he added.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Preliminary NTSB report out today on the UPS plane crash. Appears there was nothing unusual at all until the plane rotated, then the pylon for the left engine broke loose from its rear mount attachment, allowing the engine to then rotate forward and upwards, breaking the forward mount too. The engine then went up and over the wing. It was shedding parts which were ingested by the #2 engine, which was mounted in the tail, resulting in that engine also losing power. The initial break was due to pre-existing metal fatigue and overstress failure. The plane was up to date on inspections. Remains to be seen if something happened recently to cause the damage, someone missed it during an inspection, or the time between inspections needs to be shortened.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

Preliminary NTSB report out today on the UPS plane crash. Appears there was nothing unusual at all until the plane rotated, then the pylon for the left engine broke loose from its rear mount attachment broke, allowing the engine to then rotate forward and upwards, breaking the forward mount too. The engine then went up and over the wing. It was shedding parts which were ingested by the #2 engine, which was mounted in the tail, resulting in that engine also losing power. The initial break was due to pre-existing metal fatigue and overstress failure. The plane was up to date on inspections. Remains to be seen if something happened recently to cause the damage, someone missed it during an inspection, or the time between inspections needs to be shortened.

Plane in deadly UPS crash had cracks in engine mount, NTSB says

The UPS cargo plane that crashed in Kentucky earlier this month, killing 14 people, had cracks in its engine mount, investigators announced.

www.usatoday.com

The report does not say what might have led the engine mount to crack. The hardware last underwent an inspection in October 2021, according to the report. It wasn't due for its next inspection for another 7,000 flights, investigators said.

That just sounds crazy to me. but I know nothing about inspecting planes.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Plane in deadly UPS crash had cracks in engine mount, NTSB says

The UPS cargo plane that crashed in Kentucky earlier this month, killing 14 people, had cracks in its engine mount, investigators announced.

www.usatoday.com

The report does not say what might have led the engine mount to crack. The hardware last underwent an inspection in October 2021, according to the report. It wasn't due for its next inspection for another 7,000 flights, investigators said.

That just sounds crazy to me. but I know nothing about inspecting planes.

I'm an informed amateur on this stuff, not an expert by any means, but given the length of time and flights between inspections, the mount was likely not something that typically went bad. For it to fail like this suggests something happened that overstressed it. Seems like a ground strike would have certainly led to an immediate close inspection, so probably not that. I just don't know, but I feel confident that something happened to overtax that mount recently and lead to metal fatigue or stress fractures. I guess we'll learn more when NTSB finishes.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

I'm an informed amateur on this stuff, not an expert by any means, but given the length of time and flights between inspections, the mount was likely not something that typically went bad. For it to fail like this suggests something happened that overstressed it. Seems like a ground strike would have certainly led to an immediate close inspection, so probably not that. I just don't know, but I feel confident that something happened to overtax that mount recently and lead to metal fatigue or stress fractures. I guess we'll learn more when NTSB finishes.

It seems crazy to me that the last inspection was 4 years ago and not scheduled for another 7000 flights. I would think inspections for planes would be more frequent than that, especially for an older aircraft.

 

[Bishop2b5]

It seems crazy to me that the last inspection was 4 years ago and not scheduled for another 7000 flights. I would think inspections for planes would be more frequent than that, especially for an older aircraft.

I think the level and frequency of inspection varies quite a bit depending on what systems or parts are being inspected. The plane certainly doesn't get no inspection for that length of time. Some things get inspected very often, some once per month, or once every X number of flights or hours, or once per year, and etc. For example, the engines typically are inspected every 200-300 flights, depending on the hours they've been used, while the airframe itself gets a thorough inspection once every year. Critical parts prone to failure obviously get inspected more often than stuff that almost never breaks. This pylon mount, while critical as hell, is apparently not very prone to failure at all, thus the surprisingly long inspection interval.

 

[ColoradoIrish]

I think the level and frequency of inspection varies quite a bit depending on what systems or parts are being inspected. The plane certainly doesn't get no inspection for that length of time. Some things get inspected very often, some once per month, or once every X number of flights or hours, or once per year, and etc. For example, the engines typically are inspected every 200-300 flights, depending on the hours they've been used, while the airframe itself gets a thorough inspection once every year. Critical parts prone to failure obviously get inspected more often than stuff that almost never breaks. This pylon mount, while critical as hell, is apparently not very prone to failure at all, thus the surprisingly long inspection interval.

TIL

 

[Irish#1]

I would love to know what company did the inspection.

Edit: Evidently UPS did their own maintenance and inspection on that jet.

 

[drayer54]

Wasn't Climate Change to blame?

 

[Irish#1]

 

[Old Man Mike]

Yeh. Hilarious.

 

[Old Man Mike]

More hilarity.

 

[Irish#1]

The laughing is not at climate change, but the absurd measures protestors go to.

 

[Old Man Mike]

It is not a joke to many.

 

[RDU Irish]

How the Sahara Was Born

Is the Sahara thousands or millions of years old?

 

[drayer54]

The laughing is not at climate change, but the absurd measures protestors go to.

Environmental protestors and activists are the lowest of the low. They are complete lunatics. We deal with them in my line of work and they are so radical, have insane urgency, and refuse to rationalize at all. They should be mocked.

 

[Bishop2b5]

It is not a joke to many.

Do you think the radical protestors vandalizing priceless works of art, or blocking roadways, or gluing themselves to walls or streets are actually helping in any way? They aren't "raising awareness." Everyone's aware. They're alienating a large portion of the public who see the entire cause as loony instead of taking it seriously, due to their wacky antics. They aren't helping. They're attention whores. Nobody has ever said, "Hey, you know those kids threw soup on a Monet and glued themselves to a wall. I'm gonna cut back on my carbon emissions." Instead, they say to themselves, "F'n loons. Whatever they're selling, I'm not buying." You want to motivate intelligent normal people, make compelling and convincing arguments, not bombard us with radical buffoons and emotional handwringing. And yeah, we're laughing at the radical loons and their antics, not the issue itself.

 

[drayer54]

Our allies are idiots

 

[drayer54]

This issue must be (D)ifferent.

 

[Old Man Mike]

"Where the hell are the environmentalists? Oh that's right. They don't care."

I write here for my brothers on IE just because I know many of you DO care.
I don't write because I hope to change anything about the poster above.
You already know, I'm sure, that he is simply an asshole and immovable.

The quote declares that environmentalists are uncaring about this. As usual: complete lying crap.
I'll attach the major environmentalist summary of "our" concerns. Also, note that "environmentalists" are the people and the activists and the researchers who compose environmental groups and academic environmental research teams. Potomac Riverkeepers are one group, the Isaak Walton League another involved, The Potomac Conservancy a third, and there are more. None of these groups are or have been "absent" or uncaring about this. The locals are on the scene now, and have been, rather tirelessly and unappreciated in their efforts to get the data and warn of the dangers. Only COMPLETE assholes can laugh at their concerns and their commitment to the rest of us.

As to this exact issue: The whole DC system of wastewater control is rife with aging troubles. Much of the piping was put in 60 years ago during the Kennedy era. Environmentalists have been warning the federal and DC government about this for quite some time (by the way, this is not a State of Maryland jurisdictional issue, even though some water quality issues in Chesapeake Bay are --- of course Assholes care not for such subtleties.) Pipes have broken before, one even earlier this year. Trump's own EPA was notified about it, but refused to act --- the main reason being, apparently (I do not know this to be the MAIN reason, but it has been put forward in discussion), that the extent of the problem is just too expensive to contemplate. Who then has continued to warn and keep the issue alive? The local environmentalists.

We have assholes; lots of them. I have no idea what motivates them. Whatever it is, it produces the most amazing untrue slandering even of good people trying to give all of us a cleaner healthier life. This isn't "political." If other "big famous powerful people" want to use it politically, that's usually a problem. That's not why "we" (remember I was an Environmental Studies teacher) are in it. EFF the "politics." Give a damm about crap and disease and health threats and all of us.

 

[drayer54]

We must contain the retarded policies to the far corners

 

[Bishop2b5]

We must contain the retarded policies to the far corners

You're missing the point, Drayer. It doesn't matter if their policies work or not, or if they fix the problem. The point is to show that they've increased awareness and that they really really really care. Get with the program.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Ehhh ... complicated subject for sure. The politicians are doing what the voters have consistently (since Arnold Schwarzenegger) told them that they wanted. Schwarzenegger began the heavy push for Carbon Emission reduction policies in 2008(?) or so, and the State has given it a whacking big effort since, regardless of whom is in office. Grading the last nearly two decades on this is also a matter of what one cares about. The California economy continues to kick ass in terms of Gross State Product, yet the emissions rate has been much lower than the rest of the US's power states, placing CA far lower than many and even less than Texas even in the critical stat of pollution per square mile (which gives a flatter comparative field for the key concern of pollution concentration.) I'll attach a couple of illustrations. The main general criticism is the inflation costs of energy. California is higher on that due to its huge dependence upon transportation costs, and the slower-than-wished rise of green vehicles. If or when those ever roar into heavy production/use, that sector might get into line. The other often-heard objector is the "Solar's-not-dependable" fear for causing rolling black-outs. This is always championed by nuclear advocates, who interestingly usually agree that California's Energy policies WOULD work if they added nukes to it. ... so, complicated. The public thought DOES vote for it, and the politicians make bills accordingly.

 

[RDU Irish]

Milankovitch cycles - Wikipedia

Found this to be an interesting take. Curious what the smarter folks who have applied much more brainpower to the issue than me think.