Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Despite similarities to other accidents, don’t draw conclusions in UPS accident
By Scott Hamilton
Nov. 5, 2025, © Leeham News: Yesterday’s crash of a UPS Boeing (McDonnell Douglas) MD-11F evokes memories of American Airlines flight 191 in Chicago and the Air France Concorde crash in Paris.
The moment of impact of a UPS Boeing MD-11F freight that crashed on take-off from the Louisville (KY) airport. Credit: USA Today.
The UPS plane’s No. 1 engine apparently separated from the wing at around V1, the take-off speed, at the Louisville (KY) airport, where UPS’ main US hub is located. This is similar to the engine separation of the No. 1 engine of the American McDonnell Douglas DC-10 at a similar point on its take-off roll at O’Hare Airport. (This was the first aviation accident that I had as a reporter.)
American’s flight did not catch fire on take-off, but the slats on the left wing retracted after the engine damaged the hydraulic lines along the leading edge of the wing. There is a famous aviation picture of the DC-10, with its wings vertical to the ground, missing the engine, seconds before the plane crashed in a trailer park next to the airport. Valves were later added to the DC-10 to prevent such a retraction in the future.
The UPS MD-11, a derivative of the DC-10, did catch fire. So did the Air France Concorde, after running over a part that was on the runway at Charles de Gaulle Airport that fell off a preceding flight (ironically, a Continental Airlines DC-10). The Concorde’s tires threw the part into the wing fuel tank, which ignited. There is a famous picture of the Concorde, committed to take off, aloft on fire.
The UPS flight sequence, captured on multiple videos, is eerily similar to the American and Air France crashes. One video shows the MD-11 with its wings vertical to the ground, as the left wing sliced through a building seconds before impact.
Despite similarities, exercise caution in drawing conclusions.
FAA understaffing affects air operations oversight; NTSB falls short, too
Subscription Required
By Colleen Mondor
Commentary
Jan. 13, 2025, © Leeham News: When discussing the topic of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) staffing, it is traditionally Air Traffic Controllers that command media attention. Even when problems surfaced after the Boeing 737 MAX accidents in 2018-19, and following the Jan. 5, 2024, door plug failure on Alaska Airlines flight 1282, the discussion of FAA oversight remained narrow, focused only on Boeing.
Staffing levels within Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO) and how they impact commercial operations, especially among Part 135 operators, are rarely mentioned. (Part 135 operators are commuter airlines and on-demand companies.) And yet it is the inspectors for operations, maintenance, and avionics who can have the greatest positive impact on flight safety or, when absent, the most detrimental.
Between 2019 and 2023, there were 330 accidents involving Part 135 operators. (More than 100 occurred while operating under Part 91 or Part 133. Part 91 are individuals and corporate operators. Part 133 covers rotorcraft external operations.) In 11 of them, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted extensive interviews with FAA inspectors. Such interviews are largely the only way to obtain direct information on inspectors’ feelings about staffing and workload concerns. Their experiences vary, with Alaska standing out with the most severe staff shortages. A common theme is not having enough time to conduct in-person visits.