The Peckish Synapse

customboss · November 9, 2025

FAA grounded the MD11 fleet. The jet that crashed was a DC10 updated to MD11 configuration. Meaning flight engineer station was removed and computers take over flight engineer operation and both pilots monitor.
The DC10 upgrades get winglets and new engines. Im not sure vertical stab has fuel system of MD11. At AA we sold DC10 and got MD11. The MD11 has more than enough power to takeoff with 2 engines but not of left wing is melting off.

POOR MAINTENANCE PRACTICE can cause left and right engines to separate and we lost a DC10 in ORD in 1979 from that and pilot following procedure to a T that stalled the jet. This guy looks like he couldn’t get altitude or refused to for fear of stalling. Not sure which.

They passed V1 speed before engine fire bell sounded so you'd normally continue takeoff and come back around while fighting fire.

V1 allows for stopping on available runway. Past V1 you normally go.

These jets must fly really fast to avoid stalling. At altitude they fly really fast and can accelerated stall in a very tight window. Low speed stall and high speed stall window is about 10 kts or so heavy. I exceeded speed of sound one time in a TRW in South America at altitude from turbulence before we could pull

auto throttles back.

We cruised at .96 Mach most of the time. .04 from Mach1.

OnTheReel · November 9, 2025

17 hours ago, customboss said:

The MD11 has more than enough power to takeoff with 2 engines but not of left wing is melting off.

Some are suggesting engine #2 may have ingested debris from engine #1. If so they may not have even had 2 to work with.

Most people wouldn’t even trust a 34 year old car to get them to work and back. I know it’s a different animal, but it still seems a little odd to be running a 34 year old aircraft commercially considering the stresses these planes see and what’s at stake.

customboss · November 9, 2025

42 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

Some are suggesting engine #2 may have ingested debris from engine #1. If so they may not have even had 2 to work with.

Most people wouldn’t even trust a 34 year old car to get them to work and back. I know it’s a different animal, but it still seems a little odd to be running a 34 year old aircraft commercially considering the stresses these planes see and what’s at stake.

#2 is pretty high up there to get FOD.

YOU ain’t taking off at 930,000 lbs with one engine! Crash straight ahead only

option.

Aircraft get rebuilt constantly because parts time out via hrs or calender. So to be airworthy it really has nothing to do with years. If FAA certified it the only reason to crash like that is enshitification of maintenance.

It was a DC10 mod not a real MD11 so there’s that.

OnTheReel · November 10, 2025

6 minutes ago, customboss said:

#2 is pretty high up there to get FOD.

YOU ain’t taking off at 930,000 lbs with one engine! Crash straight ahead only

option.

Aircraft get rebuilt constantly because parts time out via hrs or calender. So to be airworthy it really has nothing to do with years. If FAA certified it the only reason to crash like that is enshitification of maintenance.

It was a DC10 mod not a real MD11 so there’s that.

Fair enough. I would just worry about corrosion and stress on the airframe. But I suppose most of that would be / could be caught during inspections.

One of the videos shows some sparks coming out of that other engine. But I would imagine it was providing at least some thrust regardless. I don’t know the first thing about flying and don’t have the temperament to do it. Trying to keep things under control when the ****** hits the fan is not my strong suit.

customboss · November 10, 2025

49 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

Fair enough. I would just worry about corrosion and stress on the airframe. But I suppose most of that would be / could be caught during inspections.

One of the videos shows some sparks coming out of that other engine. But I would imagine it was providing at least some thrust regardless. I don’t know the first thing about flying and don’t have the temperament to do it. Trying to keep things under control when the ****** hits the fan is not my strong suit.

May be them using full power ( sparks). We rarely do max performance takeoffs since most transport jets are way overpowered.

Now you know why I’m crazy. 30+ years of professional flying after 9

years of getting blown up military.

FAA, management and passengers post 9-11 ruined my Christianity.

newdude · November 10, 2025

19 hours ago, customboss said:

The jet that crashed was a DC10 updated to MD11 configuration. Meaning flight engineer station was removed and computers take over flight engineer operation and both pilots monitor.
The DC10 upgrades get winglets and new engines. Im not sure vertical stab has fuel system of MD11. At AA we sold DC10 and got MD11. The MD11 has more than enough power to takeoff with 2 engines but not of left wing is melting off.

55 minutes ago, customboss said:

It was a DC10 mod not a real MD11 so there’s that.

N259UP was an MD-11, not a modified DC-10. It was born a passenger MD-11, first delivered to Thai Airways July 15th 1991. Tail # HM-TME, Manufacturer Serial Number 48417, Line Number 467 (467th MD-11 built). It was converted to an MD-11F (Freighter) in April 2007.

AIRFRAME INFORMATION - UPS N259UP (McDonnell Douglas MD-11 - MSN 48417) (Ex HS-TME ) | Airfleets aviation

The only DC-10 "mod" would be the MD-10, which was set out by Boeing at request by Fedex who at the time had 104 DC-10's in the fleet. MD-10s get the MD-11 cockpit/flight deck. It was FAA certified in 2000, only 33 Fedex DC-10s were converted to MD-10.

How Does A McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Become An MD-10?

Atlas · November 10, 2025

On 11/7/2025 at 3:32 PM, asilverblazer said:

To whom, your "false... fairytale" God?

No, yours

customboss · November 10, 2025

19 hours ago, newdude said:

N259UP was an MD-11, not a modified DC-10. It was born a passenger MD-11, first delivered to Thai Airways July 15th 1991. Tail # HM-TME, Manufacturer Serial Number 48417, Line Number 467 (467th MD-11 built). It was converted to an MD-11F (Freighter) in April 2007.

AIRFRAME INFORMATION - UPS N259UP (McDonnell Douglas MD-11 - MSN 48417) (Ex HS-TME ) | Airfleets aviation

The only DC-10 "mod" would be the MD-10, which was set out by Boeing at request by Fedex who at the time had 104 DC-10's in the fleet. MD-10s get the MD-11 cockpit/flight deck. It was FAA certified in 2000, only 33 Fedex DC-10s were converted to MD-10.

How Does A McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Become An MD-10?

Checked in with my American buddies that can still think and are flying. Heres the AD directive for engine pylon issues. Hull loss for the MD-11 in its history is about 6.5% which is horrendous safety record but it was a really advanced electronic/computerized jet that required the pilot to trick F-U-C-K the computers to make sure it flew safely. At AA we called it the SCUD. We didn't know for sure when it would take off and where it would land......LOL

The FAA has ordered immediate inspections of all McDonnell-Douglas MD-11s before further flight, mandating a voluntary grounding already in place based on Boeing recommendations while more is learned about the Nov. 4 UPS MD-11 fatal accident.

The emergency airworthiness directive (AD), issued late Nov. 8, targets engine pylons, but offers few additional details. It prohibits operations "until the airplane is inspected and all applicable corrective actions are performed using a method approved by" the FAA.

The FAA directive "was prompted by an accident where the left-hand engine and pylon detached from the airplane during takeoff," the agency said, referring to the UPS accident. "The cause of the detachment is currently under investigation," it added. It does not reference any specific Boeing inspection recommendations.

With no specific inspection instructions, the AD is serving as a de facto placeholder while investigators continue their work.

The FAA directive follows Boeing's recommendations that MD-11 operators ground their tri-jets while investigators work to understand more about the Nov. 4 accident.

Boeing, which bought McDonnell-Douglas in 1997, made the recommendation late Nov. 7. “With safety as our top priority, we recommended to the three operators of the MD-11 Freighter that they suspend flight operations while additional engineering analysis is performed,” the manufacturer said. “This recommendation was made in an abundance of caution, and we will continue coordinating with the FAA on this matter.”

UPS and FedEx quickly followed Boeing’s guidance. The third remaining MD-11 operator, Western Global, did not immediately respond to an inquiry.

The manufacturer did not provide any details on what prompted its decision.

Boeing later said it supports the FAA's directive. “We will remain in close communication with the operators as they work to follow the requirements” of the AD, it added.

Investigators are in the early stages of the NTSB-led probe into the UPS accident. The MD-11, operating as Flight 2976, experienced a major engine-related failure as it was on its takeoff roll. The aircraft’s left (No. 1) GE Aerospace CF6-80C2 engine and most of its pylon separated from the wing as it was accelerating down Louisville’s Runway 17 Right. Videos show flames streaming from the inboard left wing as it took off.

The aircraft rotated and cleared the airport perimeter but went down in an industrial area less than 0.5 nm from the runway end, triggering a large fire. Officials have confirmed 14 fatalities, including all three pilots onboard Flight 2976.

Investigators have not determined whether an engine malfunction triggered the chain of events, or if the pylon separation was caused by some other issue. Also not clear is if either of the other two engines were affected. Investigators plan to conduct simulator tests over the weekend on several possible scenarios, NTSB Member Todd Inman told reporters Nov. 7.

The global MD-11 fleet is powered by two engine types: the CF6-80C2 series and Pratt & Whitney PW4000s. Boeing's recommendation and the FAA directive suggest investigators and safety experts are concerned about more than just the engine type. Boeing is among the parties participating in the probe.

Aviation Week’s Fleet Discovery database shows 59 MD-11s in service or recently parked and 10 in storage. The active fleet of 59 aircraft belongs to FedEx (29), UPS (25) and Western Global (five). It includes six aircraft that were parked for at least 30 days before the grounding.

This story has been updated to include the FAA's emergency airworthiness directive.

Grumpy Bear · November 15, 2025

Is is possible the membership is reading to much into what's been shared?

Look past what oil I use. Past how long I run it. Past what parameters I chosen to condemn it. Unless you live in my area the environment I drive in is unknown to you. Traffic in commuting also foreign. My driving style. I especially don't know the mechanical state of you motor and honestly, neither to most of their own. (You don't a leak down lately?) Each has an influence on the totality of the results.

I never said use Red Line HP or your motor will die. I never said use 5W40 in all circumstances. I never said your motor will fall apart at any OCI other that what I tell you too. I could but I wont. Why? Because of everything I don't know about each of you that you don't know about me.

I've simply been showing the results of a METHODOLYGY I use to get the RESULTS I GET. Explaining the PROCESS is universal and can be used by anyone to use ANY QUALIFIED product to the SAME result. (cap for emphasis, not yelling).

You are looking for a result and you have a method. IF that method gives you the result your after, use it! If you are looking for a different result and don't know how to get to it, then I've given you a template to systematically find another so you don't grope around in the dark.

I didn't chose the physics and neither I nor you can change those; those surrounding viscosity, solvency, temperature, load and velocity and so on. We all have to work inside those to get any favorable result by any reasonable person or measure.

I can say, in example, that oils with greater solvency produce cleaner motors AT THE SAME OCI. But I can't say that absent that constraint. A non-polar detergent oil will produce a clean motor on a short enough OCI. A non-polar, non-detergent oil will produce a clean motor on an even shorter OCI. I can even say a polar detergent oil can extend the OCI but I can't say by how much other that to state some very loose rules of thumb one can use to get started to safely proceed with the METHODOLOGY.

Millions have preceded all of us. They used a method and got a result and MOST will never see the need to revisit the method and will by happy to get those results using those means and products others that preceded them got. You don't need my approval nor condemnation, nor do you want it. It would be rude of me to insist.

I know a few things, you all know a few things. We share those things so that we all benefit. At least that is my understanding of how a forum works.

customboss · November 15, 2025

18 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Is is possible the membership is reading to much into what's been shared?

Look past what oil I use. Past how long I run it. Past what parameters I chosen to condemn it. Unless you live in my area the environment I drive in is unknown to you. Traffic in commuting also foreign. My driving style. I especially don't know the mechanical state of you motor and honestly, neither to most of their own. (You don't a leak down lately?) Each has an influence on the totality of the results.

I never said use Red Line HP or your motor will die. I never said use 5W40 in all circumstances. I never said your motor will fall apart at any OCI other that what I tell you too. I could but I wont. Why? Because of everything I don't know about each of you that you don't know about me.

I've simply been showing the results of a METHODOLYGY I use to get the RESULTS I GET. Explaining the PROCESS is universal and can be used by anyone to use ANY QUALIFIED product to the SAME result. (cap for emphasis, not yelling).

You are looking for a result and you have a method. IF that method gives you the result your after, use it! If you are looking for a different result and don't know how to get to it, then I've given you a template to systematically find another so you don't grope around in the dark.

I didn't chose the physics and neither I nor you can change those; those surrounding viscosity, solvency, temperature, load and velocity and so on. We all have to work inside those to get any favorable result by any reasonable person or measure.

I can say, in example, that oils with greater solvency produce cleaner motors AT THE SAME OCI. But I can't say that absent that constraint. A non-polar detergent oil will produce a clean motor on a short enough OCI. A non-polar, non-detergent oil will produce a clean motor on an even shorter OCI. I can even say a polar detergent oil can extend the OCI but I can't say by how much other that to state some very loose rules of thumb one can use to get started to safely proceed with the METHODOLOGY.

Millions have preceded all of us. They used a method and got a result and MOST will never see the need to revisit the method and will by happy to get those results using those means and products others that preceded them got. You don't need my approval nor condemnation, nor do you want it. It would be rude of me to insist.

I know a few things, you all know a few things. We share those things so that we all benefit. At least that is my understanding of how a forum works.

Writing style. Not reading into …too much. The writing style and presentation is what provokes, since you asked.

Peace.

Edited November 15, 2025 by customboss

KARNUT · November 15, 2025

Just now, customboss said:

Writing style. Not reading too much. The writing style and presentation is what provokes since you asked.

Peace.

Yes

OnTheReel · November 15, 2025

Meant to provoke thought. Only pre-conceived bias towards the writer provokes anything more. Don’t I know…

customboss · November 15, 2025

47 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

Meant to provoke thought. Only pre-conceived bias towards the writer provokes anything more. Don’t I know…

I admit I’m a dick. I’m sorry again help? Sorry.

txab · November 15, 2025

8 minutes ago, customboss said:

I admit I’m a dick. I’m sorry again help? Sorry.

It takes a big dick to admit he's a dick.

But everybody's a dick sooner or later

Edited November 15, 2025 by txab

OnTheReel · November 15, 2025

On 11/10/2025 at 3:01 PM, customboss said:

Checked in with my American buddies that can still think and are flying. Heres the AD directive for engine pylon issues. Hull loss for the MD-11 in its history is about 6.5% which is horrendous safety record but it was a really advanced electronic/computerized jet that required the pilot to trick F-U-C-K the computers to make sure it flew safely. At AA we called it the SCUD. We didn't know for sure when it would take off and where it would land......LOL

So in other words, like I said, they should have been put out to pasture years ago. Sounds like a terrible design and probably above the skill level of most newer pilots to fly…