Posted on 11/05/2025 8:13:39 AM PST by DFG
The engine of a UPS cargo plane that crashed on Tuesday could have detached from the jet, an expert has warned, causing a devastating fireball that killed at least nine people.
There are fears the death toll could rise after Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear announced this morning that sixteen families had reported their loved ones missing.
The Boeing MD-11 plane exploded shortly after departing from Kentucky's Muhammad Ali International Airport in Louisville last night.
Speaking with CNN, Mary Schiavo, former Department of Transportation Inspector General, said she believed the engine had come off before the explosion.
'You can see there was a fire on the left wing. You could see that the engine had detached from the aircraft before the final impact and fireball,' she said.
'Usually, when you look at an accident like this on takeoff - and I've worked many over the years - it was what was called an 'uncontained engine failure', meaning the engine spews out parts.
'They expel from that engine, and the centrifugal force from the engines, the blades spinning, and they can cut through the plane and cut fuel lines.
'It appears that fuel tank was ruptured and that would explain the fireball,' she added. Investigators are still working the scene and will make the final determination.
Images have also emerged online of what appears to be an engine on the runway of the airport following the incident.
Schiavo said the engine on the ground would help investigators figure out what went wrong.
She said: 'That's a huge clue and does give the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) a pretty good idea of what started this all off.'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
On May 25, 1979, American Airlines flight 191 crash at Chicago O'Hare after an engine fell off. 273 people were killed.
https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Airlines-Flight-191
“Could have detached”
Well, as the engine is lying in the airport infield that’s a damn good possibility.
/sarc>
CC
Aviation ping.................😪
I hope this was written by AI, and no human was involved.
I wondered about that. I thought the plane looked like a DC-10. Does anyone know who was piloting the plane?
What does a former DOT IG know about plan crash investigations?
Terrible accident. Investigations will tell us what happened. Hope the cause can be prevented in the future...
How in heck does an engine fall off??????????...............
The DC-10 Engine That Fell Off Mid-Takeoff | Mayday: Air Disaster
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jp3EbTqc5gc
The MD-11 is a variant of the DC-10.
The bolts that hold the engines on are actually hollow. They are designed to shear should an engine become off balance preventing the engine vibration ripping of a portion of the wing.
Someone forgot to nail the engine back on.
There was also an indication of a compressor stall, possibly combined with FOD damage (suggested by #2 engine sparks from the exhaust) on #2 engine after rotation. Perhaps shredded parts from #1 engine entered the #2 intake as it departed. The #2 power loss could (possibly) be suggested by a slight raising and lowering of the nose on takeoff, evident in some of the video - the #2 engine thrust holds down the nose because of the moment arm of #2 engine on the C.G., so when it loses thrust the nose raises slightly. They were rotating to 15 degrees, per the MD-11 V1 cut procedure (designed around the loss of one engine).
The fireball on the wing where the #1 engine was located was too large for the airplane to be airworthy for more than a couple of minutes. The intense heat was going to burn through just as the Concord suffered from an uncontained fuel fire. It was at least as bad as what the Concord faced, and at least as bad as the situation faced by AA 191 in 1979, though in that case the slats retracted on the left wing after the engine loss (didn’t happen here due to design modifications after that accident).
The only way the crew could have survived is by staying on the runway after V1. Runway 17R is 11,900 feet long, and even as heavy as they were, they probably had about 2,000 feet of excess runway available. The V1 speed was artificially low since the runway was so long, and rotate speed was not that far down the runway. V1 never exceeds rotate speed - the V1 speed was lowered by the software to rotate speed, even though without considering rotate speed, the runway-length-based V1 speed would have been higher.
I am not faulting the crew. They appear to have done everything they were trained to do, by the book. They didn’t know the engine departed, or that they had an uncontained fire on the left wing, and they performed a standard V1 cut as trained. The maneuver was probably hindered by partial #2 engine power loss. Even if they made it airborne, they were facing imminent wing structural failure imposed by the blowtorch on the left wing.
So a failed wing clevis due to faulty, improper maintenance?
Think of a ceiling fan with one broken blade, then imagine it spinning at several thousand rpms. When turbine blades give way, the torque of the unbalanced turbine rips the engine from the mounts.
The May 25th, 1978 United Flight 191 crash was determined by the NTSB to be caused by improper maintenance procedures when removing the engine for servicing. It was specified that a forklift was to be used to remove and then replace the engine after servicing. The NTSB determined that during the procedure, the rear support bolts were removed and somehow the forklift wasn’t supporting the engine properly and this caused stress on the still fastened front bolts that attached the engine and pylon to the wing, damaging the pylon and leading edge of the wing.
The illegal mechanic couldn’t read the sign that was in English, that said: “ENGINE BOLTS GO HERE”
“ Does anyone know who was piloting the plane?”
It wasn’t me
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.