Originally Posted by ramp9

I agree with that. But, from what I’ve seen so far on this specific instance, it’s hard for me to fully point the finger at UPS. Still combing through the information where I can on down time of this trip. Good points made by all.

Originally Posted by Lowslung

Plenty of blame to go around for sure. The fact remains that UPS’s primary competitor addressed the issue while UPS did not. Why is that? We may never be given a straight answer, but I suspect it has something to do with the fact that one operator understands how aviation works, while the other continues to treat airplanes and pilots like glorified trucks and drivers. As long as that culture continues at Brown, there will continue to be incidents that might be more naturally avoidable at an operator who’s primary concern is aviation.

Originally Posted by ramp9

Hindsight is always 20/20, but claiming the company "doesn't care about safety" because they followed the exact engineering data they were given completely misses how fleet maintenance works.

Definitely playing devil’s advocate here, but look at it like this…

Imagine you manage a fleet of 250 GMC Tahoes. GMC corporate sends out a routine, non-urgent service bulletin saying, "Hey, we noticed a hidden bearing deep inside the transmission can wear down. Our engineering team evaluated it and determined it is not a safety threat. Just have your mechanics take a quick visual look underneath during standard oil changes."

To actually tear down the transmission and replace that internal bearing proactively would cost $5,000 per truck, or $1.25 million across your fleet, and cripple your daily operations. When the manufacturer explicitly tells you it’s a low-severity item, and the regulators haven't issued a mandatory recall, no fleet manager or accountant on earth is going to disrupt their entire operation and spend over a million bucks. You trust the data and work it into normal downtime.

Now imagine it turns out GMC’s internal safety board discovered years ago that if that bearing snaps, it can lock up the transmission at 70 mph and destroy the driveshaft. But, they hid that risk analysis from the bulletins and the regulators. That is exactly what the NTSB hearing just exposed with Boeing. The airline didn’t necessarily ignore a known danger to save a buck, they followed the exact, legally mandated data stream provided by the entity that built the airplane. You can't mitigate a catastrophic hazard if the manufacturer's own service documents tell you the hazard doesn't exist.

I wasn’t able to listen in for realistically any of the NTSB investigation myself, but reading the wave tops in various articles it doesn’t sound to me like UPS was given a fair chance. That said, FedEx took the information differently and made some adjustments to their “Tahoes,” so that is another factor to consider.

We’re all trying to digest this new information, but I think everyone should step back and put the bias aside to look at the facts as they stand. Maybe I’m trying to rationalize their actions (inactions?) because I know less financial unknowns that exist for UPS, the less they have to hide behind regarding “financial instability.” And that could get things moving in the right direction in other areas that we may also be invested in as pilots. But I won’t blame UPS out of pure spite.

Originally Posted by BoilerUP

UPS got the revised Boeing MD11 bearing Service Letter in 2011, and determined "no further action required".

That's one year after Flight 6 which didn't have full-face O2 masks, and two years before Flight 1354 didn't have the no-cost EGPWS upgrade installed.

Boeing could/should have communciated to operators every time a bearing migration issue was discovered after that revised 2011 SL. That said, the timeline of those three specific decisions/events represent a trend line that objectively doesn't reflect well on corporate/airline decisionmaking with regards to operational flight safety and has reprecussions to this day.

Originally Posted by ramp9

I agree with that. But, from what I’ve seen so far on this specific instance, it’s hard for me to fully point the finger at UPS. Still combing through the information where I can on down time of this trip. Good points made by all.

Originally Posted by BrowntownNewbie

1 JA for a 6hr turn is $1968.86 x 13 PP = $25608.18 for the year.

you diehards have been yelling no JAs for 3 years now. That’s $76,824.54 you want me to give up? So I can join the “IPA Fan Club Diamond status”.

I came here to work hard, make money, and retire. You can keep worshiping BT and the gang, I’m not violating the contract. I’m here to take care of my family first.

Originally Posted by BrowntownNewbie

1 JA for a 6hr turn is $1968.86 x 13 PP = $25608.18 for the year.

you diehards have been yelling no JAs for 3 years now. That’s $76,824.54 you want me to give up? So I can join the “IPA Fan Club Diamond status”.

I came here to work hard, make money, and retire. You can keep worshiping BT and the gang, I’m not violating the contract. I’m here to take care of my family first.