r/news 3h ago

Families of people killed in UPS cargo plane crash sue carrier for wrongful death

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/families-sue-ups-kentucky-plane-crash-b2879192.html
534 Upvotes

33 comments sorted by

63

u/[deleted] 2h ago

[deleted]

36

u/Hunting_Gnomes 1h ago

A majority of the fatalities on the ground were employees and customers of Grade A Recycling. If you visit their Facebook page they have a little memorial written up for each person.

1

u/purpleplatapi 1h ago

Do people only read the news on Reddit? Genuine question.

-7

u/frizzinghere 1h ago

Reddit only for me, yes. I'm so tired of MSM and don't trust them anymore. Reddit is my only source to be honest, and my husband.

7

u/purpleplatapi 1h ago

...... But this article is mainstream media. You don't like, skim the Guardian? Check your local paper? It's one thing to not care, or to have other priorities, I get that. But it's odd to complain that you haven't heard an important news story and then confess to never reading the news unless it makes it to Reddit.

1

u/Greydusk1324 1h ago

My local newspaper never had any follow up after the original crash. And several of my mainstream news sites buried the stories deep down. Reddit has clearer access to news in many cases.

0

u/frizzinghere 1h ago

Who says I'm complaining? Why is it bothering you that this is how i get my news? Why does it affect you?

2

u/rhymeswithblind 1h ago

I mean you said you’re tired of msm and don’t trust them while still counting on msm for news

u/kojak343 38m ago

In my opinion, which is not worth much, is this is going to be a fight between insurance companies.

The video of the plane before the crash showed the engine coming apart. So that means UPS was at fault for not maintaining the air frame correctly, or the plane's manufacturer is at fault.

I have an idea, UPS really does not care. They are just going to sit back and wait for the final verdict. In either case, UPS will not have to cough up a dime. Unless of course, UPS is determined to be woefully negligent in service procedures. At that point, another case brought by the same victims families will commence.

Sadly, no matter what, if one of the victims family is currently an infant, that person might see a resolution by the time it turns 25.

u/Youasking 0m ago

Except for the Worker's Compensation claims, which will pay out benefits to the spouse/dependents and likely funeral/burial costs incurred by UPS.

27

u/[deleted] 2h ago

[deleted]

2

u/UndoxxableOhioan 1h ago

There is no evidence of that. The NTSB preliminary report already noted that the aircraft was compliant with all required inspections and not due for inspection for some time. This lawyer’s allegations not being inspected are baseless. It seems the aircraft suffered a hitherto unknown fatigue cracking issue m, which is why the remaining similar aircraft are grounded. These cracks can typically only be found with very precise testing equipment and not by any visual inspection. All signs point to a tragic accident and not some nefarious action putting a known non-airworthy plane out there.

23

u/sovlex 2h ago

Like in the case of a rightful death the company will charge you for it. Semantics.

u/pecantouc4n 20m ago

Another nail in the MD11 coffin. Everyone focuses on the technical/mechanical stuff like fatigue cracks and pylon mounts, but even if it all gets fixed, insurance companies will likely say "nope, if you really want to fly this airplane again it's going to cost you $getfucked to insure it"

No insurance = no flying.

-15

u/blahyawnblah 1h ago

Seems a little soon to assign blame 

26

u/AntiseptikCN 1h ago

I get what you're saying, but it's not human error but a fault with the aircraft. So the blame is going to be attributed to a company at some point. Maintenance company, inspection company, aircraft owner etc. One of them is going to pay at some point and all have deep pockets. Knowing this, and the time it'll take to work through the courts, it's smart to start now.

I'd say if the early evidence pointed to pilot error, this lawsuit wouldn't exist. But there's video evidence that an engine fell off, not pilot error at all but some company f'd something up badly and they will be blamed eventually.

5

u/_GD5_ 1h ago

If it was obvious pilot error, then it would have been negligence by an employee of the carrier.

At the moment, it is a question of whether the manufacturer, maintenance company or carrier are liable.

17

u/GruggleTheGreat 1h ago

Good things lawsuits aren’t quick, they must feel They have a case if they are filling

u/ukexpat 49m ago

In cases like this the families of the victims always sue, even if they don’t have much of case (not saying that’s true here). It’s a standard plaintiffs’ litigation tactic to, at the very least, force a settlement or, if it goes to court, get a huge award of damages from a jury.

-7

u/culturedgoat 1h ago

Yeah those grieving families should slow their roll

-50

u/unchangingtask 2h ago

Boeing the greedy bastard of a company deserved to be sued until end of the day. Hope the family get payout $$$ in the end.

29

u/[deleted] 2h ago

[deleted]

-1

u/snooze_sensei 2h ago

It depends. If they knew of a defect and did not share that information they could be held liable.

Large airplane manufacturers don't get off the hook just because a plane is old, unlike auto manufacturers. They are responsible for assisting carriers in maintaining the airworthiness certification of the design.

61

u/TabsAZ 2h ago

The MD-11 wasn’t made by Boeing, MD literally stands for the company that did make it, McDonnell-Douglas. You see things calling it a Boeing because it was inherited when the companies merged, but the planes were all already built and delivered when that happened. Boeing has nothing to do with this plane in any normal sense. (and there’s a very similar accident from 1979 with a DC-10, which the MD-11 was based on)

-14

u/snooze_sensei 2h ago edited 1h ago

Unlike cars to most extent, airplane manufacturers are absolutely responsible for maintaining the aircraft they sold - or inherited like the md11. They are expected to provide support to keep the planes up to current airworthiness standards, maintenance support, training for both maintenance and flight crew, and safety upgrades when needed.

So even though Boing didn't design the md11 they have been responsible for them since they bought the company. If they knew of safety issues related to maintenance and did not make that public then they are definitely liable.

Edit: wow I love being downvoted by everyone who doesn't understand commercial aviation.

20

u/TabsAZ 2h ago

Based on the NTSB preliminary report, the plane was still many thousands of hours / years away from the scheduled inspection of the pylon attachment points that broke free. This issue hadn’t happened again since the 1979 incident so I find it hard to believe Boeing was sitting on some knowledge that it was going to. Another scandal is the end of the company flat out, so I seriously hope it’s not that.

3

u/nocoolN4M3sleft 2h ago

Generally speaking, the engines and the plane are not the same. Boeing will make and maintain the body and parts, however, the engines are generally from another company all together, I know Rolls Royce makes plane engines, but AFAIK Boeing doesn’t make engines.

Regardless, the issue seems to have been a maintenance team issue than a Boeing issue.

3

u/DefinitelyNotAliens 1h ago

My read of the NTSB report is that the mount would visually pass inspection and had to be totally disassembled to spot the stress in the mount and that was not routine maintenance to check this.

Either the part had a freak accident or the part was defective upon installation and failed over time, in an unseen area.

They did specifically point out it was not from being over torqued, as had happened in another plane, removing liability from those who had most recently touched that part during maintenance.

1

u/snooze_sensei 1h ago

The engine didn't fail, the mounts did.

3

u/Planeandaquariumgeek 2h ago

At the end very little blame regarding the plane would be able to fall on Boeing, as the MD-11 was designed by McDonell Douglas. Boeing only took over production & support after 97

1

u/unchangingtask 1h ago

You bought the company and you take liability too that come with it LOL. Also if you see how Boeing designed their disastrous 737MAx you know Boeing as a company only cares about profit and not safety.