Boeing Knew About Flaws in UPS Plane That Crashed in Louisville, N.T.S.B. Says

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/us/louisville-crash-report.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ElA.RW_u.VWGAWZbL4F7A

41 Comments

  1. uhohnotafarteither on

    They better watch out, they are about to have to pay a $1,200 fine without admission of guilt

  2. Chris_HitTheOver on

    > The N.T.S.B. has said that cracks in the assembly holding the left-side engine in place may have contributed to the November crash, though it has not officially cited a cause. The part had fractured in similar fashion on at least four other occasions, on three different airplanes, according to the report, which cited a service letter that Boeing issued in 2011 regarding the apparent flaw.

    So the left engine fell off, causing a fiery crash and explosion, but we’re not sure if the structural cracks in the assembly that connects the left engine to the left wing was the cause…? Do I have that right?

    Jesus fucking Christ.

  3. SharpLocal1235 on

    the fact they informed everyone about the issue with the race doesnt exonerate them but it does shift blame. still, they said the fatigue induced separation wouldnt lead to a crash so apparently that was wrong – it mustve resulted in overloading the lugs and causing them to fail as well

  4. Sure they knew about it, they issued a notice to operators indicating the need for repeated checks and offered a redesigned part, but the original part was never officially removed from airworthiness or whatever the terms are. If it was dangerous enough to need a new design, it was probably dangerous enough to remove from service.

  5. FourEightNineOneOne on

    Before we start the “BOEING BAD” comments (which are often well deserved), let’s note a couple things here:

    1. The plane wasn’t built by Boeing. It was built by McDonnel Douglas in 1991. Boeing later bought McDonnel Douglas.
    2. Boeing acknowledged the structural issue in a memo to all owners of the planes and recommended they inspect it, but that they didn’t believe it would impact any safety on the planes.
    3. This report doesn’t conclude that structural flaw caused the engine to separate. It just noted the flaw as a possibility. This isn’t the final report, that will take more time for the NTSB to develop.
    4. The plane was 34 years old. Questionable maintenance on the plane is also a likely culprit as to what happened vs a manufacturing flaw on a plane that old.

  6. gosh go figure, it’s just like I said when it happened. someone knew and wasn’t allowed to fix it then the inevitable crash happened. it’s not the first time and won’t be the last.

  7. Your package has been delivered to “CRASH SITE”!

    Please leave us a review of your product and delivery experience below

  8. Why is anyone surprised by this?

    “A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do one.” Fight Club

  9. Any fines are just the cost of doing business. It’s the same thing for did with the pinto.

  10. this “Boeing knowing” would be like if whoever made your car knew a bearing would fail after x amount of distance traveled, because their owner’s manual mentioned you should have that part inspected and replaced with a better part

  11. SleepingDragon_ on

    > It was taking off from Louisville and bound for Hawaii on Nov. 4 when a fire ignited on its left engine shortly after takeoff.

    Is that what happened? A fire?

  12. Anything to make more profit!!!! They didnt care I bet because the one loss only sets them back so much , screw peoples lives and anyone else just make that profit . . . When we going to learn Corporations dont care about people ?

  13. Antique-Freedom-8352 on

    “Take the number of vehicles in the field (A), multiply by the probable rate of failure (B), multiply by the average out-of-court settlement (C). A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do one,”

  14. Was it even a Boeing plane? I thought it was an MD-11 or something similar.

    Edit: So according to the article, Boeing purchased McDonnell Douglas.

  15. Nowadays I actually select flights based on the aircraft flown, even if it means a worse schedule or more expensive ticket.

    I genuinely lost all trust in Boeing planes as a commuter.

  16. The executives at Boeing need to be in prison. HUNDREDS dead from Boeing crashes in the last decade due to problems caused by money grubbing cost cutting.

  17. There are so many known issues in every plane and every engine in large jets like this. They have systems in place to routinely inspect and replace parts at very specific intervals. Boeing knows about a lot of flaws in a lot of things. Had anyone known this particular airplane had flaws in it to that extent that would cause that airplane to crash, they would not have hesitated to ground that plane.

  18. No shit. They build whatever measly fines will be lobbed at them after they kill hundreds of people into their bottom line.

  19. this is what happens when you cut back on regulations and inspections – aka “we should trust the manufacturer to ‘do the right thing'”

  20. Man a whole lotta aviation design experts in here seem to suddenly know everything about aircraft design. Especially given this plane isn’t even a Boeing design….

  21. poppin-n-sailin on

    Keep letting them get away with this, and it will continue. anyone surprised by this is a straight up idiot. and no, a few fines isn’t a punishment. like usual, the fines th3se companies face are a drop in the bucket relative to the money and time they’d have to spend fixing issues. but, the people in charge know all this so nothing will change.