UPS A300 down

A cold front with LIFR/IFR/MVFR conditions is slowly moving through the area. Landing just before sunrise. Two pilots reported not found yet.
 
Ugh. Lots of packages ore going to be "late".
Better hope it was not grandma's irreplaceable photo album on that flight.
And hoping the crew was able to get out.
 
Dr. O said:
Ugh. Lots of packages ore going to be "late".
Better hope it was not grandma's irreplaceable photo album on that flight.
And hoping the crew was able to get out.
Click to expand...
You stay classy there, Denny.

Two Freight Dogs are dead. RIP.
 
Ugh! Can't find the pilots, always a bad sign. My guess is they will figure this one out fast. Very sad for the crew.
 
AdamZ said:
Ugh! Can't find the pilots, always a bad sign. My guess is they will figure this one out fast. Very sad for the crew.
Click to expand...
Judging by the photos and video of the scene, they can't even get close enough to look for the pilots. Very sad indeed.
 
Dr. O said:
Ugh. Lots of packages ore going to be "late".
Better hope it was not grandma's irreplaceable photo album on that flight.
And hoping the crew was able to get out.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to get worked up over this. Just want to point out people are dead and nobody here gives a #?&! about any packages onboard.
 
I think the question will be whether there was some mechanical failure or alternately what sort of pilot error/human factors was related. That said, they'll probably sum it up as "The pilot's failure to maintain..."

A300 was in production for a while. I wonder what vintage it was.
 
Oh, and to the topic...sad indeed. I know a few people at UPS. I'll need to check in with them today sometime (like everyone else in the world they happen to know).
 
AdamZ said:
Ugh! Can't find the pilots, always a bad sign. My guess is they will figure this one out fast. Very sad for the crew.
Click to expand...

One news story I saw indicated that they had found the two pilots - unfortunately, deceased.
 
The cabin looks largely intact, but the forces encountered are so extreme ... so sad to see this. Condolences to anyone that knew the pilots and their familys.
 
Both pilots reported dead now. RIP.
 
tmyers said:
The cabin looks largely intact, but the forces encountered are so extreme ... so sad to see this. Condolences to anyone that knew the pilots and their familys.
Click to expand...

Sad for the crew...:sad:


Amazingly, the cabin looks VERY survivable... Must have been the negative G's...:dunno:
 
negative G's?

Slamming into the ground would be positive G's.
 
N801BH said:
Sad for the crew...:sad:


Amazingly, the cabin looks VERY survivable...:
Click to expand...

I thought that as well when I saw some initial pics. But a few more i've seen look like the cabin was torn up

Sad to hear
 
Last edited:
I was driving past the airport about the time this happened and visibility was near zero. I'm just guessing, but my bet is low on approach, overcorrected into a stall. Prayers for the families involved reguardless of what happened. :(
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I think the question will be whether there was some mechanical failure or alternately what sort of pilot error/human factors was related. That said, they'll probably sum it up as "The pilot's failure to maintain..."

A300 was in production for a while. I wonder what vintage it was.
Click to expand...

These days the odds are always going to favor human factors. Not saying that was the cause, just that in most cases of crashes that is what it comes down to. Regardless, a plane is down and it is almost a sure thing that two people lost their lives. RIP. :sad:
 
ScottM said:
These days the odds are always going to favor human factors. Not saying that was the cause, just that in most cases of crashes that is what it comes down to. Regardless, a plane is down and it is almost a sure thing that two people lost their lives. RIP. :sad:
Click to expand...

The difference between human factors and classic pilot error is that human factors looks at what could have been different in the airplane or procedures, if anything, to prevent the crash. It's the difference between "You dumbass!" and "You screwed up, but what about the environment could have helped prevent the the screw-up?"
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I think the question will be whether there was some mechanical failure or alternately what sort of pilot error/human factors was related. That said, they'll probably sum it up as "The pilot's failure to maintain..."

A300 was in production for a while. I wonder what vintage it was.
Click to expand...

The A300 was in production until 2007 if I recall. The aircraft in question here, N155UP, had its first flight in 2003. By my standards, that's new :)

To go go back to your first paragraph, I think lots of people want to think there's a mechanical reason behind every crash. Unfortunately, statistics show that's usually not the case, particularly with transport category aircraft.

Here's the METAR for the time of the accident:
KBHM 140953Z 34004KT 10SM FEW011 BKN035 OVC075 23/22 A2997 RMK AO2 SLP141 T02330222

Weather, on first glance, does not appear to be a significant factor in terms of ceiling or visibility. It was an early flight though, so low light conditions may come in to play.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The difference between human factors and classic pilot error is that human factors looks at what could have been different in the airplane or procedures, if anything, to prevent the crash. It's the difference between "You dumbass!" and "You screwed up, but what about the environment could have helped prevent the the screw-up?"
Click to expand...
I understand and agree.

I had that conversation with a professional pilot on this group years ago that was adamant that they way you do something is it, no ands if and buts. I tried to explain that is fine thinking for a line pilot, but not for an engineer. We spend our time trying to figure out what in the environment could be changed to prevent those errors for the next time. You, like me, come from that background, so we understand that thought process.

Regardless in today's accident, the most likely cause is the result of carbon based equipment on board. Not a mechanical failure. While a set of circumstances could be changed to present information to the pilots to help them over come a situation, the bottom line is that they were not, for whatever reason, able to overcome a set of circumstances.

Again, not saying that is what happened in this crash at all. Just speaking in general.
 
Turningfinal said:
The A300 was in production until 2007 if I recall. The aircraft in question here, N155UP, had its first flight in 2003. By my standards, that's new :)

To go go back to your first paragraph, I think lots of people want to think there's a mechanical reason behind every crash. Unfortunately, statistics show that's usually not the case, particularly with transport category aircraft.

Here's the METAR for the time of the accident:
KBHM 140953Z 34004KT 10SM FEW011 BKN035 OVC075 23/22 A2997 RMK AO2 SLP141 T02330222

Weather, on first glance, does not appear to be a significant factor in terms of ceiling or visibility. It was an early flight though, so low light conditions may come in to play.
Click to expand...

Yep, 2003 is definitely new. I think UPS typically flies a more modern fleet, compared with FedEx, which typically flies older.

You're right that normally there isn't a mechanical problem, usually the people making mistakes. The problem I ask myself (as Scott points out, the way engineers think) is how to make a better machine that will help the pilots.

But in this case, we'll see...
 
Ted DuPuis said:
You're right that normally there isn't a mechanical problem, usually the people making mistakes. The problem I ask myself (as Scott points out, the way engineers think) is how to make a better machine that will help the pilots.
Click to expand...

Yep. The only problem you run into is stubborn pilots who don't "want" any more help. I hear that from Boeing guys all the time :wink2:

On a side note, does anyone know where this aircraft went down in relation to the runway it was approaching?
 
Turningfinal said:
Yep. The only problem you run into is stubborn pilots who don't "want" any more help. I hear that from Boeing guys all the time :wink2:
Click to expand...

Help doesn't necessarily mean the aircraft flies for you. It can also involve procedures, layout, and even crew rest. CRM came out of human factors. In the 690B crash thread I mentioned a couple of human factors problems I found with the 690 when I flew it.

Sorta like why I've been doing various changes to the 310 - color coded switch covers, blue prop knobs, LED panel lights all make it easier for me to see and identify the right thing when flying.
 
Not sure how the METAR was 10sm. I was driving about 5 miles away and the visibility in my car sucked with drisseling rain.
 
teethdoc said:
Not sure how the METAR was 10sm. I was driving about 5 miles away and the visibility in my car sucked with drisseling rain.
Click to expand...

If the METAR came from a AWOS without human oversight it's very possible.

Our AWOS in Arkadelphia sucks to put it frank. The VIS sensor is often clogged up with trash and the wind vane is behind a row of trees. The only thing that works reliably is both the cloud and temp/dew sensor.

I've flown in at night with the station reporting 10SM VIS because the fog was above the photocell.
 
Last edited:
ARFlyer said:
If the METAR came from a AWOS without human oversight it's very possible.

Our AWOS in Arkadelphia sucks to put it frank. The VIS sensor is often clogged up with trash and the wind vane is behind a row of trees. The only thing that works reliably is both the cloud and temp/dew sensor.

I've flown in at night with the station reporting 10SM VIS because the fog was above the photocell.
Click to expand...

At KBHM I'm almost certain it's augmented by human observers (controllers).
 
Flightaware's "Result Unknown" is kinda eerie...

y4uhaba6.jpg
 
denverpilot said:
Flightaware's "Result Unknown" is kinda eerie...
Click to expand...

It says that about me a lot. But I'm still here.

It is eerie when you're watching someone else and get that, though. Worse when you know what the result was. :(
 
Two pilots gone may they rest in peace.after looking at weather and flight aware the airplane may have tried to duck under the mins .for the approach.
 
Flight Aware graph looks like 9000ft descent in 2 min. Sad stuff.
 
kontiki said:
Flight Aware graph looks like 9000ft descent in 2 min. Sad stuff.
Click to expand...
Flight Aware sometimes shows funny stuff. I'm not sure how accurate that is. If you see the wreckage, it was not straight in. Most definitely had alot of forward motion. Looks alot like they hit the trees and then either cartwheeled or otherwise hit the left wing first and then the aircraft broke up.
 
frfly172 said:
Two pilots gone may they rest in peace.after looking at weather and flight aware the airplane may have tried to duck under the mins .for the approach.
Click to expand...


KBHM 140953Z 34004KT 10SM FEW011 BKN035 OVC075 23/22 A2997 RMK AO2 SLP141 T02330222

Don't really see that there was anything to "duck" under.

Eyewitnesses are basically worthless, I have yet to hear a jet engine "sputter" as one witness said.

I would take the avtracker data with a grain of salt. I don't know how accurate it is minute to minute. Having said that, to lose that much altitude in that much time isn't unheard of. BHM tends to dump you coming from the north.

Obviously something went horribly wrong but I'm not going to armchair quarterback it. The black boxes will tell, just have to be patient.

Prayers to the families.
 
UPS pioneered the use of ADS-B in applications for the industry. I'm sure it broadcast GPS position, track, alt, to ATC for the whole flight to an accuracy not possible 5 years ago. I do favor waiting for the NTSB to make their report.
 
Turningfinal said:
On a side note, does anyone know where this aircraft went down in relation to the runway it was approaching?
Click to expand...

This photo was posted over on another board.. The arrow points to the Pine trees the plane took the tops off, the impact point on the hill is said to be some 500yrds beyond the trees.


 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top