Posted on 12/05/2025 11:51:29 AM PST by CondoleezzaProtege
The families of victims killed in the UPS Airlines MD-11 freighter crash last month are set to file a wrongful death lawsuit against multiple parties. According to reports, the suit alleges negligence on the part of UPS and also names engine manufacturer GE Aerospace and planemaker Boeing, which took over McDonnell Douglas, the MD-11's original manufacturer.
Last month's tragic crash led to the death of 14 people, including the three-person crew and another 11 people on the ground, after the McDonnell Douglas MD-11 freighter's left engine ripped off the airframe during takeoff, sending it plummeting into an industrial park. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has since revealed in its preliminary report that it found evidence of fatigue cracking on the aircraft.
The suit claims negligence against UPS and UPS Air. It also names GE as the engine manufacturer, Boeing as the successor to McDonnell Douglas (the MD-11’s original manufacturer) and VT San Antonio Aerospace, which conducted inspections and maintenance prior to the crash. Clifford Law Offices stated that the MD-11 airframe was "old, tired, and well beyond its useful life," raising questions about whether profits were prioritized over safety.
(Excerpt) Read more at simpleflying.com ...
This is all on the operator and the inspections. GE and Boeing had nada, zilch, nothing to do with it. This the “deep pockets” nonsense. One thing we have got to do in this country is get rid of joint and several liability. Why don’t they sue the contractors who built the runway, the people who supplied the concrete, and the owners of all the packages that were on board while they are at it. May be the flight crew and maintenance crews moms and dads for having them. What about the builders and owners of the buildings that were in the way?
First, kill all the lawyers.
OMG, what a godless statement. I agree 100%.
My understanding is that the McDonnell Douglas plane model had a bad rap even before it was “old” and was limited to freight/cargo instead of passenger flights as a result.
But now we see how freight/cargo flights also put lives in jeopardy…
At one time there were counterfeit bolts bring slipped into the market. Something about the cheaper bolts being stamped as #12s or something like that. I wonder if there are still some around. You don’t often read about engines falling off. But counterfeit bolts would do the trick.
“At one time there were counterfeit bolts bring slipped into the market.”
When I was in A&P school in 96’ they warned us about Chinese fakes back then.
True about the bolts but the investigation is tracking cracks in the pylon mounts, not the bolts.
Nope - Not Boeing, not GE.
The maintenance outfit - improper maintenance procedure - maybe UPS. That’s it.
This isn’t the same context as the 737 Max, which was fully on Boeing.
<“In the lawsuit, the victims’ families allege that UPS operated the 34-year-old plane when it was not airworthy and created unsafe conditions for employees and the public by “implementing inadequate maintenance, inspection, or operational procedures.” They’re also accusing Boeing of knowing the risk for catastrophic failure but failing to notify companies and air crews.”
Sue God for creating the Laws of Physics ...
Shouldn’t be a problem to find a lawyer that arrogant.
They will get a settlement from the insurance companies. So sad.
It was the EXACT same failure in the same aircraft model and type. Your hate for Boeing notwithstanding. Those who know how to fly, flew. Inexperienced no time pilots were overwhelmed when confronted with the failure. Yes system fault, not critical, unless you don't know your bird. Hard to do when you are a couple hundred hours after soloing in a Cessna to master a complicated system. No experience with flying, let alone a 737. You couldn't be more wrong, but you're still trying. Exact same problem, different outcomes. Difference? Experience and basic pilotage skills. Third world Airways.
This is an older model (MDD not a Boeing original) with no MCAS software and different design flaw.
Boeing used to be good, but it went to the dark side post McDonnell-Douglas merger leadership. (At least that’s where whistleblowers claims was the turning point.) Case and point.
But what’s most disturbing is the communist-like denial, gaslighting, and moral evasion so readily on display in defense of the Deep State CEO’s who run it. No matter how much literal blood is on their hands.
“EXACT same failure”
You really are a lunatic to think a failure of the UPS crash is anything similar to the Boeing 737 MAX issue.
That's cute. Now we wait for actual facts to be revealed. Facts about inspections and maintenance procedures ... and whether or not UPS was doing what Boeing told them to do.
My understanding is that the McDonnell Douglas plane model had a bad rap even before it was “old” and was limited to freight/cargo instead of passenger flights as a result.
That statement contains at least two errors.
1) The DC10/MD11 did not have a "bad rap" ... it was flown for countless hours successfully in passenger service. The 1979 accident was shown to result from the airline engaging in some really stupid maintenance practices ... contrary to instructions from McDonnell-Douglas ... that damaged the engine pylon.
2) The DC10/MD11 was withdrawn from passenger service, along with other tri-jets, because tri-jets ceased to make sense. At one time, trans-Atlantic and other long over-water were restricted to jets with more than two engines. Three engines are more efficient than four ... so Douglas, Lockheed, and Boeing all developed tri-jets. Improvements in engine reliability led to ETOPS. Two engines are more efficient than three ... and all the tri-jets quickly vanished from passenger service. Cargo lines bought them cheap, and they served for many years in that role with great success.
I think it was as that they used a forklift to change the engine rather than the GE advised method involving a sling or some such. They may have ditched the approved method. This has resulted in a crash I think once before.
Yes.
Sorry. I thought we were still on the 737. It is obvious that this was a maintenance issue. Of course there was MCAS, all aircraft have them to some degree because of the aerodynamic farces involved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.