Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5646562/

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: olddominion727
Posted 2012-12-29 09:19:28 and read 18749 times.

I remember these carriers flew both the DC10 and the L10 11. Some of them at the same time. Was that a wise decision because 4 of the 8 carriers are now bankrupt?

HA, PA, BA, EA, UA, TZ, BR (british caledonian), DL

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: luv2fly
Posted 2012-12-29 09:23:56 and read 18740 times.

It had more to do then flying both the DC10 and L1011 that is for sure

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-29 09:25:42 and read 18719 times.

Well, DL only flew the DC-10s at first (mid 70s), while waiting for the Tristars to be delivered. The 10s left pretty quick after the Tristars arrived. After the DL/WA merger (after '87), the ex-WA 10s also left pretty quickly after the merger.

The first 10s that DL had were sold to UA and then leased back to DL while waiting for the L-1011s.



BTW, I non-revved from ORD-ATL in January of '74.........down on a DC-10 and back on an L-1011 (or vice versa..can't remember).

[Edited 2012-12-29 09:34:30]

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2012-12-29 09:33:29 and read 18611 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
Was that a wise decision because 4 of the 8 carriers are now bankrupt?

When you consider that UA acquired their TriStars by way of their purchase of PA's Asian routes, I'd say it turned out to be a very wise move.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: UA787DEN
Posted 2012-12-29 09:35:21 and read 18592 times.

By that token, flying the 767 with the 330 or 300 is a bad idea, or flying the 737 and 320, or 777 and 340. For an airline to go bankrupt, you need more than just competing plane types. Airlines are merging into other plane types. It isn't the best cost management to have 20 DC10s and 5 L-1011s but it won't kill you by itself.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-29 09:36:17 and read 18569 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 3):
When you consider that UA acquired their TriStars by way of their purchase of PA's Asian routes, I'd say it turned out to be a very wise move.

I remember when DL was looking at buying some of those Tristars from PanAm, but didn't like what they found. AFTER UA got them, then they bought them from UA.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: srbmod
Posted 2012-12-29 09:43:25 and read 18515 times.

Delta's first foray with the DC-10 was as a backup plan in case the L-1011 program was scrapped (Rolls Royce almost going under in 1971 delayed their RB211 engines and at that point, it was too late in the design phase to swap engine manufacturers.). They leased them from UA and returned them once they started to get L-1011s. They acquired them again as part of the merger with Western and retired them within a few years, as the L-1011s were their widebody trijet of choice (until they got MD-11s).

BA's order for the L-1011 was made by BEA prior to the merger that created BA and the DC-10s came in via the merger with BCal. BA's charter subsidiary Caledonian (which was renamed from British Airtours) operated the L-1011 and DC-10 as they essentially passed them down to Caledonian's operations.

Eastern operated both because their L-1011s didn't have the range of other L-1011s variants and needed something with more range and got the DC-10s.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: STT757
Posted 2012-12-29 09:45:10 and read 18487 times.

I got to fly on both the L1011 and DC-10 with Pan Am, great experience.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: longhauler
Posted 2012-12-29 09:46:11 and read 18474 times.

I think you would have to look at the chain of events that lead to having flown both types, either at the same time, or at different times.

It's not like an airline went from Douglas then to Lockheed and ordered both at the same time, to fly at the same time.

The only one that might come close would be Delta, and for them it was the same reason Pan American flew both the DC-8 and the B707 at the same time .... their first choice was coming later, and they had to order their second choice to remain competitive while waiting for their first choice. (Of course, in the case of Pan American, they found when flying both that their second choice was better suited to their operations.)

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Crosswind
Posted 2012-12-29 09:49:17 and read 18452 times.

British Caledonian never flew the L1011, only the DC-10.

When BA took over the company in 1987, they also took over B.Cal's DC-10s which continued to be used on LGW long-haul routes until the late 1990s.

To keep the Caledonian name alive, BA reanmed their charter subsidiary British Airtours to Caledonian Airways, this also helped distance the company from the tarnished brand after the 1986 Manchester air disaster.

So Caledonian never flew the L1011, although the type did wear the Caledonian name it was a separate company. Interestingly from the mid-1990s Caledonian Airways did operate DC-10-30s alongside the TriStars, as they provided the ability to operate non-stop to to Florida, Western Canada and the Caribbean which the TriStar lacked. So the types were largely complimentary in Caledonian Airways ops.

British Airways ended up operating both types soley through the takeover of B.Cal, but in the end the DC-10-30 outlasted the TriStar. I think again the DC-10-30s range made it more useful than the TriStar, although once the 777s started to arrive the DC-10s days at BA were numbered.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © David Oates


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © NJP
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © David Oates


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © David Ilott
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wingnut


Regards
CROSSWIND

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: ushermittwoch
Posted 2012-12-29 09:55:41 and read 18399 times.

Good times.

My last DC-10 flight was TPA-LGW with Caledonian.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: PlymSpotter
Posted 2012-12-29 09:57:22 and read 18384 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
HA, PA, BA, EA, UA, TZ, BR (british caledonian), DL

British Caledonian's circumstances were mostly beyond their control, ultimately they were purchased by BA and didn't go bankrupt.


Dan  

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: FlyCaledonian
Posted 2012-12-29 11:19:39 and read 17979 times.

Quoting Crosswind (Reply 9):
British Airways ended up operating both types soley through the takeover of B.Cal, but in the end the DC-10-30 outlasted the TriStar. I think again the DC-10-30s range made it more useful than the TriStar, although once the 777s started to arrive the DC-10s days at BA were numbered.

The DC-10 was effectively operated by Caledonian Airways (KT) twice. The first time was under BA ownership when one aircraft carried KT colours and operated the BA flights to Nassau, Grand Cayman, San Juan and Tampa with a BA code. As these were leisure routes I think it suited BA to make use of the lower costs of KT. The aircraft was one of the ex-BCal DC-10s based at LGW.

As has been said, the KT TriStars came from British Airways/British Airtours and were used on high density charter flights within Europe. I was always surprised BA didn't move the TriStar 200s over to KT (Many were traded in with Boeing for 767-336ERs) to replace the TriStar 1s (many of which were upgraded to TriStar 50/100 standard).

Once KT was sold off, it added DC-10s of its own for use on long haul charter flights. It also operated other TriStars from Air Atlanta Iceland.


I've read in a couple of books about BA that the DC-10s hung on at LGW so long as BA was pleaseantly surprised by their capabilities. Yet this wasn't BA's first experience of operating the DC-10, as for a number of years it leased an Air New Zealand (TE) DC-10 to operate LAX-LHR (and that was also used on a LHR-BOS sector if I recall). There was also a big attempt by Douglas to get BA to purchase the DC-10 by proposing a RR RB211 powered version (that would have been the DC-10-50) but BA ultimately opted to go for the TriStar 500 for its long and thin requirements.

Now if BA had kept the BCal order for the MD-11 they would have joined that even more select club of carriers who had operated all three three-holer widebodies.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: RWA380
Posted 2012-12-29 13:35:34 and read 17535 times.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 6):
Eastern operated both because their L-1011s didn't have the range of other L-1011s variants and needed something with more range and got the DC-10s.

IIRC, this was to operate the MIA-LGW route that EA was awarded.

As far as HA goes, the L10's were used for mainland services, as HA & AA were close buds during the day, HA started obtaining used DC-10's from AA to replace the aging L10's, if you'll remember the HA DC-10's were in the same metal finish as AA's birds. And HA has done pretty well for themselves with the DC-8's, DC-10's, L10's and now 767's and 330's.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Hawai...d=11804ab30f27f98a795601fa9c44f7f0

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-29 15:06:12 and read 17237 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 7):
I got to fly on both the L1011 and DC-10 with Pan Am, great experience.

Pan Am only operated both types due to the merger with National which occurred after they'd ordered the 12 L-1011-500s. I flew on both and the L-1011s were best avoided, at least in Y class, as they had cramped 10-abreast charter-type seating, while the ex-National DC-10s were the more usual and more comfortable 9-abreast.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: DariusBieber
Posted 2012-12-29 15:30:53 and read 17077 times.

I don't think the aircraft is to blame when a company files bankruptcy. Competition, lack of interest, and poor managing come into play first.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: DouglasDC10
Posted 2012-12-29 15:46:19 and read 16762 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
I remember these carriers flew both the DC10 and the L10 11. Some of them at the same time. Was that a wise decision because 4 of the 8 carriers are now bankrupt?

HA, PA, BA, EA, UA, TZ, BR (british caledonian), DL

Well, none of them actually really planned to operate both types.

DL was actually the only one to order both fresh from factory. They placed an early order for five aircraft as they feared that the L-1011s would not be available on time. When it became clear that the TriStars would be more or lees available on time, the aicraft were transferred to United. Later they got another bunch of DC-10s through the merger with Western. If you count a deal through a leasing company as an order as well, ANA would be the only other one (see below).

UA got their TriStars as a package deal with Pan Am when United acquired the rights for some of the routes the TriStars flew on.

PA and BA got their DC-10s through mergers with National and BCal respectively. Caledonian was formed out of BCal and BA's charter arm which used TriStars. The DC-10s had a better range and were used on routes the TriStar was not able to fly as Crosswind and FlyCaledonian have lined out.

HA and TZ replaced their TriStars with DC-10s at a time when both types were available for cheap prices on the second hand market, but the DC-10 was available in higher numbers, offered more range and had also some younger low-time frames on the market (TZ's DC-10s were among the last built).

EA got their DC-10 to operate transatlantic flights where their early-built TriStars lacked range. The offer to lease three former Alitalia birds was too good to let it pass.

By the way, AF, IB and GA have wet-leased TriStars as well while parallely operating DC-10s. AC operated the DC-10 through acquisition of CP (though the DC-10 was phased out before both airlines were merged into one operaion). ANA ordered DC-10-10s but switched to the TriStar before the order was finalized. The ANA birds went to Turkish Airlines.

Oh, forgot CO which was pretty close to operate TriStars in the late 1980s or early 1990s as well, but the deal fell through in the last minute.

[Edited 2012-12-29 15:48:50]

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Bellerophon
Posted 2012-12-29 17:32:48 and read 15410 times.

Crosswind

Did you by any chance ever work for BCal / Caledonian? You've got their history spot on!   

...British Caledonian never flew the L1011, only the DC-10...although the type did wear the Caledonian name it was a separate company...to keep the Caledonian name alive, BA renamed their charter subsidiary...Caledonian Airways...

For their new livery, Caledonian kept British Caledonian's "Golden Lion" insignia on the tailplane of their aircraft, but for some inexplicable reason the tip of the lion's tail - which had been turned "in" on British Caledonian livery - became turned "out" on Caledonian livery, something that can be seen in your photos!


...Caledonian did operate DC-10-30s alongside the TriStars, as they provided the ability to operate non-stop to to Florida, Western Canada and the Caribbean which the TriStar lacked...made it more useful than the TriStar...

True, and, in Caledonian, the DC10 also had a better serviceability record than the L1011, and I spent two happy years on loan to Caledonian, as a Captain on the DC10.

However, with 399 seats, the Caledonian L1011 did have the very useful ability to "collect and rescue" all the passengers from (just about) any other aircraft which had gone AOG, in one go, even if it did sometimes have to stop for refuelling on the way!

Happy New Year to all A-Netters ......... especially those who worked for "Yellow Dog" airways!!

Bellerophon

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: captainstefan
Posted 2012-12-29 18:04:05 and read 15022 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 5):
I remember when DL was looking at buying some of those Tristars from PanAm, but didn't like what they found. AFTER UA got them, then they bought them from UA.

The PUDs!

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: VV701
Posted 2012-12-29 18:05:01 and read 15026 times.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 8):
When BA took over the company in 1987, they also took over B.Cal's DC-10s which continued to be used on LGW long-haul routes until the late 1990s.

BA had operated DC-10 30s more than 10 years before their purchase of BCal.

In the mid 1970s BA had a problem with their LHR-LAX service. Their 707s were not competitive with the wide-bodies that PA and TW were using by then on that route. So BA were loosing share. Of course they had their 747s but they were too large to operate the route profitably. And their L1011s did not have sufficient range to serve LAX from LHR. So in May 1975 they initiated a 4-year agreement with NZ.

Under this agreement an NZ DC-10-30 operated AKL-HNL-LAX each day. On arrival at LAX instead of turning round and flying back to AKL it was transferred to BA. It was then flown LAX-LHR-LAX on behalf of BA with both BA flight and cabin crews. On its return to LAX it was transferred back to NZ for the return flight to HNL and AKL. All these flights were operated with the aircraft in full NZ livery.

At the start of the 1978 summer schedule the agreement between BA and NZ still had a year to run. However traffic on the LHR-LAX route had grown. To meet the higher passenger demand BA launched a 747 service on the route on Days 1 through 5. Their agreement with NZ was modified so that BA could operate the NZ DC-10s on a 5-times weekly LHR-MIA-LHR and 3-times weekly LHR-YUL-LHR service. Although BA now effectively had two DC-10s on lease from NZ, the aircraft were still rotated with others in the NZ fleet. At weekends the two aircraft were returned to NZ and exchanged for two other aircraft at LAX by operating the Day 6 and 7 LHR-LAX-LHR BA rotations. This redeployment actually increased the BA operation of NZ DC-10s from what was effectively about 1.5aircraft to 2 aircraft.

At the end of the 1978/79 Winter Season the BA / NZ agreement was terminated and almost ten years would pass before BA again operated the DC-10..

So BA's reason for operating both the L-1011 and DC-10 was, like EA's, range - see Reply 6.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: rickabone
Posted 2012-12-29 19:27:22 and read 14188 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
Was that a wise decision because 4 of the 8 carriers are now bankrupt?

My guess is that more than 4 out of every 8 carriers in general are now bankrupt or no longer exist.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TrijetsRMissed
Posted 2012-12-29 20:41:04 and read 13432 times.

EA is the only airline IMO that is suspect with operating both the L-1011 and DC-10. But it goes much further than a favorable lease deal for three -30s to cover long haul flying.

Passing on the Tristar 500 is where EA went wrong. It would have helped EA in the later years, had they standardized on the L-1011. But EA did not benefit from that cost savings.

The problem was EA could not afford an L-1011-500 order to begin with, (circa 1979-80). The critical miscalculation was in the 757 order, which put EA in a debt that they never recovered from. Operationally, the 757 was not a success for EA on the balance sheet either. In hindsight, EA would have been far better off never ordering the 757 and using the funds for the Tristar 500.

Supplemental/replacement 727 capacity could have been accomplished with a more favorable MD-82 order, 2-3 years later. With the DC-9 operations and support, the MD-82s would have fit in fine. And there's no doubt MDC were willing to deal.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
Was that a wise decision because 4 of the 8 carriers are now bankrupt?
HA, PA, BA, EA, UA, TZ, BR (british caledonian), DL

Perhaps a good question to stir up discussion. But I don't believe it for a was a significant cause for the aforementioned carriers. (excluding EA from above).

A list of airlines who mistakenly ordered/flew the 747 classic would be far greater.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: milesrich
Posted 2012-12-29 20:41:43 and read 13431 times.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 6):
Delta's first foray with the DC-10 was as a backup plan in case the L-1011 program was scrapped (Rolls Royce almost going under in 1971 delayed their RB211 engines and at that point, it was too late in the design phase to swap engine manufacturers.). They leased them from UA and returned them once they started to get L-1011s. They acquired them again as part of the merger with Western and retired them within a few years, as the L-1011s were their widebody trijet of choice (until they got MD-11s).

Delta ordered them directed for MDD. They then sold them to UA and leased them back. They were returned to United by 1975.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TrijetsRMissed
Posted 2012-12-29 20:50:37 and read 13330 times.

Quoting milesrich (Reply 23):
Delta ordered them directed for MDD. They then sold them to UA and leased them back. They were returned to United by 1975.

         That is correct. To add, the aircraft were not sold to UA until the Lockheed's production was up and running.

What is not common knowledge is that the DL DC-10 order included 20 options. These options were to have been exercised if there were another Tristar delay/setback. Furthermore, Lockheed were dangerously close to missing the final SLA/deliverables that would have allowed for a complete cancellation by DL, with virtually no penalty. How history may have been different...

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: woodsboy
Posted 2012-12-29 21:49:50 and read 12828 times.

Im not at all trying to be rude, but the suggestion that because an airline operated a DC-10 or L-1011 they went bankrupt is a nonsense correlation with absolutely zero basis in reality. You might be able to make an argument that an airline may have moved into a type that was too big (say, PSA with the L-1011) or expanded too quickly with jumbos or whatever else. But you can create a correlation for just about anything you want to show an airline went bankrupt, the fact that an airline operated a particular type of aircraft may or may not have played a role in bankruptcy. Since every major airline in America has been in bankruptcy and some did operate those types but not all of them did, you can draw a totally fake parallel if you like between ANY aircraft type and financial difficulty, it just makes no difference.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TrijetsRMissed
Posted 2012-12-29 22:44:19 and read 12602 times.

Quoting woodsboy (Reply 26):

Im not at all trying to be rude, but the suggestion that because an airline operated a DC-10 or L-1011 they went bankrupt is a nonsense correlation with absolutely zero basis in reality.

Perhaps a better wording would've been citing L-1011/DC-10 combo for negative cash flow, rather than outright bankruptcy.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: zippyjet
Posted 2012-12-30 00:58:37 and read 11656 times.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 8):
(Of course, in the case of Pan American, they found when flying both that their second choice was better suited to their operations.)

You got me confused. I thought PAA wanted the 707 but bought the 8's to hedge their bets. At first PAA went with 25 8's and 20 707's. But the 707 came out first. PAA eventually kept their 707's and let go of their DC-8's. And then came the jumbo 747.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Lofty
Posted 2012-12-30 04:41:29 and read 10020 times.

I was the Technical Planning Officer for DC10, Tristar and B747 for BA at LGW, so covered the:
BA - DC10, B747
KT - L-1011, DC10 and B747 (MGS)
RAF - 2 x L-1011 ex BA


Just for clarity "British Airtours" was renamed to "Caledonian" as part of the takeover of "British Caledonian" was that the name "Caledonian" had to remain with-in the BA Group. This also lead to the "Caledonian Girls" still wearing the Tartan Uniform. I do remmeber a B737 flying around at the time with British Airways on one side and British Airtours on the other.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: KFlyer
Posted 2012-12-30 04:59:01 and read 9734 times.

Well, three of the list also are some of the most profitable today ( DL, HA, BA). Once you have built up a certain scale - flying two types really does not bring any additional costs or inefficiencies. However, it is in a way true that these carriers went bankrupt largely owing to their inefficiencies and that operating both D10 and L10 is an example to that.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: jfk777
Posted 2012-12-30 06:43:03 and read 8425 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
I remember these carriers flew both the DC10 and the L10 11. Some of them at the same time. Was that a wise decision because 4 of the 8 carriers are now bankrupt?

HA, PA, BA, EA, UA, TZ, BR (british caledonian), DL

Only British Caledonian ordered their Dc-10's from Douglas directly. The othe airlines got their planes used or by merger. EA and HA got them because the Dc-10 performed a mission they didn't have planes to do. PA & BA got their palnes by merger even though they were big L-1011 users. United's Asian use of L-1011-500 has to be the most fascinating use of the plane by any airline.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: viscount630
Posted 2012-12-30 07:59:03 and read 7412 times.

Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 17):
For their new livery, Caledonian kept British Caledonian's "Golden Lion" insignia on the tailplane of their aircraft, but for some inexplicable reason the tip of the lion's tail - which had been turned "in" on British Caledonian livery - became turned "out" on Caledonian livery, something that can be seen in your photos!

The Heraldic Lion design changed subtly several times. It was different in the original Caledonian colours. changed again when it became Caledonian//BUA and later with BCal and the "new" Caledonian (AND Cal-Air which was a seperate carrier created from the old British Caledonian Charter after BA bought BCal)

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-30 07:59:29 and read 7410 times.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 29):
Only British Caledonian ordered their Dc-10's from Douglas directly. The othe airlines got their planes used or by merger. EA and HA got them because the Dc-10 performed a mission they didn't have planes to do. PA & BA got their palnes by merger even though they were big L-1011 users. United's Asian use of L-1011-500 has to be the most fascinating use of the plane by any airline.

Wrong. DL ordered theirs directly from Douglas, as has been mentioned above. Then they were sold to UA and leased back from them until L1011s started to arrive.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: zrs70
Posted 2012-12-30 08:07:37 and read 7273 times.

Well, a number of carriers that flew both the 727 and 737 are now bankrupt too.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: longhauler
Posted 2012-12-30 08:12:52 and read 7192 times.

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 26):
You got me confused. I thought PAA wanted the 707 but bought the 8's to hedge their bets. At first PAA went with 25 8's and 20 707's. But the 707 came out first. PAA eventually kept their 707's and let go of their DC-8's. And then came the jumbo 747.

I think it depends which book one reads, and one would have to talk to Juan Trippe himself to get the real truth.

The impression I get from reading "The Chosen Instrument", is that Pan American was backing Douglas and the DC-8, as they had been a strong supporter of Douglas products. They ordered 20 B707s as an interim measure awaiting the later DC-8s, which initially appeared a better product.

Given the opportunity, Boeing improved its B707 from the initial offer to the -320 series, then the -320B series. As history shows, this better suited Pan American and went on to a huge B707, then B747 fleet.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: yyz717
Posted 2012-12-30 08:44:02 and read 6790 times.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 6):
Eastern operated both because their L-1011s didn't have the range of other L-1011s variants and needed something with more range and got the DC-10s.

EA only operated 3 DC-10-30's and they were procured for MIA-London.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 12):
I've read in a couple of books about BA that the DC-10s hung on at LGW so long as BA was pleaseantly surprised by their capabilities.

I've read the same thing.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 12):
There was also a big attempt by Douglas to get BA to purchase the DC-10 by proposing a RR RB211 powered version (that would have been the DC-10-50)

The proposed RR-powered DC-10 was called the DC-10-30R, not the DC-10-50. A google search will show it was offered to BA in 1976.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: WA707atMSP
Posted 2012-12-30 08:59:03 and read 6594 times.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 21):
The problem was EA could not afford an L-1011-500 order to begin with, (circa 1979-80).

In 1979/80, EA did not have any routes that required the range of the L-1011-500, or DC-10-30; their longest routes were US transcontinental routes.

By the time EA had routes that were beyond the range of their L-1011-1s (MIA-LGW / SCL / EZE), the L-1011 had gone out of production. EA could have purchased used L-1011-500s from PA or BA to operate these routes, but chose to buy used DC-10-30s instead.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: CF-CPI
Posted 2012-12-30 09:13:37 and read 6412 times.

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 35):
but chose to buy used DC-10-30s instead.

Engine commonality with the A300B4s already in EA's fleet made the DC-10-30 purchase less odd than it might have been.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TrijetsRMissed
Posted 2012-12-30 12:44:56 and read 5955 times.

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 35):
In 1979/80, EA did not have any routes that required the range of the L-1011-500, or DC-10-30; their longest routes were US transcontinental routes.

Maybe true. But my argument is built of the premise of EA executing a different strategy. There was nothing preventing EA from launching TATL service, post-deregulation. Regardless, my statement on EA's funds being tied to the 757, and the consequences that followed are completely factual.

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 35):
EA could have purchased used L-1011-500s from PA or BA to operate these routes, but chose to buy used DC-10-30s instead.

I don't think so. EA didn't have the capital for the purchases. Even though the Tristar 500 was out-of-production, it's residual value was not at basement prices in 1985. EA were near bankruptcy at this point. The DC-10-30s provided a unique opportunity at a reasonable lease price. The DC-10's were not bought from AZ; they were leased from 3rd parties.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-30 12:50:36 and read 5945 times.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 37):


I don't think so. EA didn't have the capital for the purchases. Even though the Tristar 500 was out-of-production, it's residual value was not at basement prices in 1985. EA were near bankruptcy at this point. The DC-10-30s provided a unique opportunity at a reasonable lease price. The DC-10's were not bought from AZ; they were leased from 3rd parties.

Just wondered why EA couldn't have converted some of their domestic Tristars to -250s, as DL did?

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: strfyr51
Posted 2012-12-30 13:02:15 and read 5930 times.

the United L1011-500's came with the Pan am Pacific division and once we got them operating correctly they were fine airplanes to the point that Delta bought them from UA Changed the seat covers and flew them with in a few days of delivery the airplanes only had 208 seats aboard and flew mainly SFO-Osaka Kansai International. KIX

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-30 13:19:56 and read 5880 times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 39):
the United L1011-500's came with the Pan am Pacific division and once we got them operating correctly they were fine airplanes to the point that Delta bought them from UA

That's why we bought them from UA after having rejected the same a/c when PA offered them.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: FlyCaledonian
Posted 2012-12-30 14:05:04 and read 5803 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 34):
The proposed RR-powered DC-10 was called the DC-10-30R, not the DC-10-50. A google search will show it was offered to BA in 1976.

I've read in books that the RR powered version was to be the DC-10-50, and whilst not always to be relied upon Wikipedia also states that the RR powered version was to the DC-10-50. I'm intrigued why it would be a DC-10-30R, when the P&W powered DC-10 was the DC-10-40 rather than a DC-10-30P.

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: yyz717
Posted 2012-12-30 14:16:15 and read 5753 times.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 41):
I've read in books that the RR powered version was to be the DC-10-50, and whilst not always to be relied upon Wikipedia also states that the RR powered version was to the DC-10-50. I'm intrigued why it would be a DC-10-30R, when the P&W powered DC-10 was the DC-10-40 rather than a DC-10-30P.

I couldn't find any evidence to the DC-10-50 in a google search. I also recall the DC-10-30R nomer when it was offered to BA (yes, I'm dating myself now)  

No doubt a RR DC-10 would have caused heart attacks at Lockheed HQ.

As for the naming convention who knows? The original DC-10-20 was renamed the DC-10-40 after it was in service. The DC-10-30 was successful with many customers so perhaps MDD rationale was to keep the DC-10-30 name and add the R to the end. I'm surmising of course.  

Topic: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-30 14:23:30 and read 5714 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 34):
Quoting srbmod (Reply 6):
Eastern operated both because their L-1011s didn't have the range of other L-1011s variants and needed something with more range and got the DC-10s.

EA only operated 3 DC-10-30's and they were procured for MIA-London.

In addition to MIA-LGW, the DC-10s were intended to be used on MIA-MAD where Eastern was awarded traffic rights in 1985. They never started that route. Related news items.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...20miami%20madrid&pg=1480%2C2683041
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...20miami%20madrid&pg=1220%2C2074892

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: srbmod
Posted 2012-12-30 15:35:48 and read 5519 times.

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 35):

In 1979/80, EA did not have any routes that required the range of the L-1011-500, or DC-10-30; their longest routes were US transcontinental routes.

By the time EA had routes that were beyond the range of their L-1011-1s (MIA-LGW / SCL / EZE), the L-1011 had gone out of production. EA could have purchased used L-1011-500s from PA or BA to operate these routes, but chose to buy used DC-10-30s instead.

Eastern in the late 70s was trying to obtain the MIA-LGW route authority and had a deal in place with QF to acquire two 742s from them for that service (as well as service to Hawaii), but when they failed to get the MIA-LGW authority, the deal fell through and by the time they got the MIA-LGW rights, they got the DC-10s. Eastern had also operated the 741 for a time while waiting for their L-1011 deliveries. So had they gotten the LGW route in the late 70s, they perhaps wouldn't have operated the DC-10 at all.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: bx737
Posted 2012-12-30 18:24:43 and read 5326 times.

Quoting viscount630 (Reply 30):

Cal Air was founded by British Caledonian as their charter division and operated 3 DC10-10s. According to the inflight magazine of Cal Air from 1987, Cal Air was founded in 1982. When BA took over BCal, they had to sell Cal Air. It was sold to the Rank Organisation and renamed Nov Air. This bit of trivia is just to confuse issues further. Nov Air also took over Cal Air's order for 2 Boeing 737-400s and operated these until their collapse in about 1992.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: zippyjet
Posted 2012-12-30 18:42:35 and read 5289 times.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 33):

Maybe a bit off topic and some trivia: PAA initially ordered De Havilland Comets when they first came out however, the catastrophic crashes nixed that deal. PAA then waited like almost everyone else for the DC-8's and 707's.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: jfk777
Posted 2012-12-30 19:10:02 and read 5252 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 31):
Wrong. DL ordered theirs directly from Douglas, as has been mentioned above. Then they were sold to UA and leased back from them until L1011s started to arrive.

You are WRONG again, delta got Dc-10 when they merged with Western Airlines.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-30 19:17:22 and read 5240 times.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 48):
Quoting mayor (Reply 31):
Wrong. DL ordered theirs directly from Douglas, as has been mentioned above. Then they were sold to UA and leased back from them until L1011s started to arrive.

You are WRONG again, delta got Dc-10 when they merged with Western Airlines.

Mayor is not wrong regarding DL's first batch of 5 DC-10s operated from 1972/73 to 1975. You are correct concerning their 2nd batch of DC-10s inherited from the Western merger 12 years later.

All 5 of the early '70s batch below, registered N601DA through N605DA.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bob Garrard
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bob Garrard


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bob Garrard
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bob Garrard


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bob Garrard



[Edited 2012-12-30 19:23:55]

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: milesrich
Posted 2012-12-30 19:22:00 and read 5230 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 5):
I remember when DL was looking at buying some of those Tristars from PanAm, but didn't like what they found. AFTER UA got them, then they bought them from UA.

The "World's Most Experienced Airline"'s regular maintenance of their equipment was at such a level that American end up suing Pan Am over the National DC-10's they received from Pan Am in the 747-123 trade. Delta didn't keep Pan Am's A-310's very long either. Even Eastern, when they were near bankruptcy, took better care of their planes than the Chosen Instrument.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-30 19:40:37 and read 5178 times.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 48):
You are WRONG again, delta got Dc-10 when they merged with Western Airlines.

Read your history.....I was THERE when we took delivery of the first batch of 5 DC-10s, FROM Douglas in '74-'75. Therefore, I am NOT wrong again, because I was correct in the first place.

Quoting milesrich (Reply 50):
Delta didn't keep Pan Am's A-310's very long either.

I remember the ex-PanAm people telling me, when I was in TLV, that they hoped one of the first things that DL repaired on the A-310s was the onboard loading system as on most of the a/c, it was inoperative and the pallets and containers had to be maneuvered into place by hand. On one of the a/c, the pallet locks just inside the front door, had to be taped in a deployed position once the pallets were loaded and before the door was shut.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: milesrich
Posted 2012-12-30 19:44:25 and read 5158 times.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 48):
Quoting mayor (Reply 31):
Wrong. DL ordered theirs directly from Douglas, as has been mentioned above. Then they were sold to UA and leased back from them until L1011s started to arrive.

You are WRONG again, delta got Dc-10 when they merged with Western Airlines.

jfk777, what do you mean, wrong again? And why is WRONG all caps? I flew on Delta DC-10's that they received in 1972 several times, and then flew on the same aircraft after they were sent to United. I suggest before you tell someone they are wrong, YOU get your facts straight.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TZTriStar500
Posted 2012-12-30 20:32:02 and read 5052 times.

Quoting DouglasDC10 (Reply 16):
HA and TZ replaced their TriStars with DC-10s at a time when both types were available for cheap prices on the second hand market, but the DC-10 was available in higher numbers, offered more range and had also some younger low-time frames on the market (TZ's DC-10s were among the last built).

To correct you here, the ex-NWA DC-10-30s TZ got were NOT low time airframes. Three of them were early 80's and all eventually went to World. All the rest were mid 70s. Omni actually got the best of the lot, and we got what was left.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: PMUA787
Posted 2012-12-30 20:44:58 and read 5005 times.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 21):
Operationally, the 757 was not a success for EA on the balance sheet either

I remember seeing EA 757's at GSP in the mid 1980's on the ATL route, a whopping 140 miles.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: yyz717
Posted 2012-12-30 21:12:02 and read 4954 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 49):
Mayor is not wrong regarding DL's first batch of 5 DC-10s operated from 1972/73 to 1975. You are correct concerning their 2nd batch of DC-10s inherited from the Western merger 12 years later.

All 5 of the early '70s batch below, registered N601DA through N605DA.

Aerotransport.org also confirms that these 5 DC-10-10's were delivered new to DL in 72-73.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: United1
Posted 2012-12-30 21:43:47 and read 4896 times.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 48):
You are WRONG again, delta got Dc-10 when they merged with Western Airlines.

Just to confirm what others have said DL operated the DC-10 twice during their history.

The first time they ordered 5 DC-10s as a sort of insurance policy against any further delays by Lockheed/RR on the L1011. As part of an agreement with United the 5 DC-10s were sold prior to delivery to UA and then leased back to DL. Once the L1011s were delivered the DC-10s were returned to UA where they flew until UA sold them to FX. I didn't look the history of the other 4 up but as of a year ago at least M601DA was still in service with FX as N377FE.

The second time they inherited a number of frames due to the Western merger.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-30 21:50:46 and read 4882 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 51):
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 48):
You are WRONG again, delta got Dc-10 when they merged with Western Airlines.

Read your history.....I was THERE when we took delivery of the first batch of 5 DC-10s, FROM Douglas in '74-'75. Therefore, I am NOT wrong again, because I was correct in the first place.

Actually, thinking back, I was around when we got the second batch of DC-10s with the WA merger, also.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: scbriml
Posted 2012-12-31 03:49:53 and read 4549 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 31):
Wrong. DL ordered theirs directly from Douglas, as has been mentioned above. Then they were sold to UA and leased back from them until L1011s started to arrive.
Quoting yyz717 (Reply 55):
Aerotransport.org also confirms that these 5 DC-10-10's were delivered new to DL in 72-73.

While these five DC-10s were undoubtedly delivered direct to DL, Boeing does not list Delta as a customer for the DC-10!

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: VV701
Posted 2012-12-31 04:39:17 and read 4490 times.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 59):
While these five DC-10s were undoubtedly delivered direct to DL, Boeing does not list Delta as a customer for the DC-10!

I believe this is because they were ordered and sold to UA and immediately leased by DL as stated in Reply 31. They were returned to UA after DL's L-1011s had been delivered.

As an example, N620DA was sold by Boeing to UA on 10 November 1992 and leased to DL that day. It was returned to UA as N1834U on 23 April 1975.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: NASCARAirforce
Posted 2012-12-31 05:56:22 and read 4360 times.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
I remember these carriers flew both the DC10 and the L10 11. Some of them at the same time. Was that a wise decision because 4 of the 8 carriers are now bankrupt?

HA, PA, BA, EA, UA, TZ, BR (british caledonian), DL

That is 4 our of 8, that is pretty much better than average because I think more than half of all airlines ever created go bankrupt. It is just coincidence that they went bankrupt - neither really flew huge fleets of both at the same time

add a small cargo/charter airline Arrow Air that flew both L1011 and DC-10, I think briefly at same time that went bankrupt in 2009.

The majority of bankrupt and gone carriers didn't fly either or just flew one of the type just some off the top of my head

Olympic - neither
Mexicana - DC-10
Aero Peru - DC-10
TWA - L1011
Braniff - neither
Sabena - DC-10
VIASA - DC-10
Faucett Peru L1011
Varig DC-10
Most of the late 1970s/early 80s Post - Deregulation US carriers flew neither

I think some of these airlines that fly or flew huge fleets of both 737s and Airbus narrow bodies like United, Delta, American (soon), US Airways, Easy Jet, British, Lufthansa, ANA, and many others are still successfully still around

Or how about airlines flying the 777 and A330/A340

Cathay Pacific
Delta
Emirates
Air France
KLM
Thai

and many more

are all still doing quite well

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: dtw9
Posted 2012-12-31 06:12:49 and read 4338 times.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 59):
While these five DC-10s were undoubtedly delivered direct to DL, Boeing does not list Delta as a customer for the DC-10!




Because it was never a firm order, it was a LOI. There's more to the Delta order then we will ever know. United had ordered 30 DC-10's in 1968 but the order was later reduced to 22. Douglas then re marketed these delivery positions and Delta took up five with a LOI. Then somehow United reordered these five in March of 1971 at the same time Delta signed their LOI. So there appears to have been a deal between Douglas, United and Delta before the LOI was placed. I wonder how many people here know that China airlines had a firm order for two DC-10-30's that were never delivered because the Government of Taiwan wouldn't sanction the order. One was even painted in full China airlines colors yet they don't show up as a customer for the DC-10 either.

[Edited 2012-12-31 06:15:43]

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: CF-CPI
Posted 2012-12-31 06:44:11 and read 4279 times.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 58):
Any commonality with the A300B4's engine was dumb-luck and not a driving factor in lease agreement.

At the time, Frank Borman said the engine commonality was a significant factor. I forget the exact words, but it was something to the effect that "people ask me why we took on the DC-10 .... " and he responded with the engine info. No doubt it was just one aspect, I'm sure. The L1011-500 had lower per-trip costs than the DC-10-30, but the larger -10 had better seat mile figures. Assuming that EA could fill the seats on the DC-10, it may have been a better choice economically.

I have spoken to a former EA f/a, who was pretty senior and got to fly the Latin routes. She said cabin crew loved working on the DC-10s, because everything functioned well. I love the L1011-500, but I'd be curious as to whether the Tristar's reputation for needing extra tender loving care on its complicated systems factored in to EA's decision making. People who worked on both the standard and the -500 model say that they really were two distinct types in terms of systems, cockpit, etc., so the benefits of commonality may not have been so great as they would appear. Furthermore, AC personnel who worked on both stated that both sizes of L10 were equally 'high maintenance', each in their own way.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-31 09:17:39 and read 4068 times.

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 63):
Quoting scbriml (Reply 59):
While these five DC-10s were undoubtedly delivered direct to DL, Boeing does not list Delta as a customer for the DC-10!




Because it was never a firm order, it was a LOI. There's more to the Delta order then we will ever know. United had ordered 30 DC-10's in 1968 but the order was later reduced to 22. Douglas then re marketed these delivery positions and Delta took up five with a LOI. Then somehow United reordered these five in March of 1971 at the same time Delta signed their LOI. So there appears to have been a deal between Douglas, United and Delta before the LOI was placed. I wonder how many people here know that China airlines had a firm order for two DC-10-30's that were never delivered because the Government of Taiwan wouldn't sanction the order. One was even painted in full China airlines colors yet they don't show up as a customer for the DC-10 either.

OK......I got this directly out of "DELTA, History of an Airline" by Lewis & Newton, University of Georgia Press, 1979:

"At a special meeting of the board of directors on March 28. 1971, therefore, a decision was made to order five DC-10s From McDonnell Douglas as a temporary measure pending further developements. A contract was soon executed specifying deliveries in late 1972 and early 1973."

Later, after it was known that the Tristar program would survive:


"The five McDonnell-Douglas DC-10s that the firm had ordered in 1971 for insurance purposes while the fate of the TriStar still hung in the balance would now be operated only as a stopgap while the L-1011s were being built, and an agreement was therefore announced in June 1972 transferring the ultimate purchase rights to these ships to United Air Lines."

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: jfklganyc
Posted 2012-12-31 09:27:41 and read 4029 times.

I dont think flying these aircraft contributed to the demise (BK) of any airline.

Factors that went into that were much larger than this.

The DC 10 was extermely successful aircraft and flew right into the 90s.

The L1011 was much less successful in terms of quantity and profitablity for the manufacturer. However, airlines, crews, and passengers that had them loved them. They also flew through the 90s and through 9/11.

On a personal note, my last DC 10 flight was EWR-FCO on CO. Coach, middle seat, middle section...terrible product.

My last L1011 flight was EA MIA-LGA. Aisle seat on right side of aircraft. Beautiful plane. Eastern was a mess. We had a 5 hour delay because they filled the plane and the guages didn't register the fuel. Guys were literally sticking dip sticks in the wing. They went out of business within a year...she was a tired bird and a tied airline at that point

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-31 09:37:21 and read 4006 times.

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 66):
Guys were literally sticking dip sticks in the wing. They went out of business within a year..

That's not all that uncommon. Not sure how the system works on the L1011, but, for instance, on the 727, if a gauge is inop, normal procedure is to pull down the appropriate "stick" from the bottom of the wing to determine how much fuel is in the wing before you start pumping it on board. Sometimes, when we had a full fuel load, we'd pull down the outermost stick and fill the tank until the fuel started squirting out of the stick, indicating that the tank in that wing was full.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: luckyone
Posted 2012-12-31 09:47:30 and read 3977 times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 39):
flew mainly SFO-Osaka Kansai International. KIX

United's L-1011s were gone from the fleet by 1989, well before KIX opened in 1994. Any flights to Osaka would have been to Itami airport.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: DouglasDC10
Posted 2012-12-31 10:16:53 and read 3922 times.

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 63):
I wonder how many people here know that China airlines had a firm order for two DC-10-30's that were never delivered because the Government of Taiwan wouldn't sanction the order. One was even painted in full China airlines colors yet they don't show up as a customer for the DC-10 either.

So did Egyptair and Lauda (although there was no fully painted Egyptair DC-10 AFAIK while there was an at least partially painted Lauda DC-10-30CF which was later delivered to Fed Ex).

Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 53):
To correct you here, the ex-NWA DC-10-30s TZ got were NOT low time airframes. Three of them were early 80's and all eventually went to World. All the rest were mid 70s. Omni actually got the best of the lot, and we got what was left.

You are right. The late TG and JAS birds (all late eighties) went all to Omni while TZ got some ex-Korean and Swissair aircraft. which were early 80s late 70s. However, compared to other DC-10s and late L-1011s they were still pretty young, offered better range than the L-1011 fleet and were relatively cheap when few used A340/330-300 and 777-200/-200ER were on the market. They were #183/184/187/188/199 and 292. While the ex-Swissair aircraft were pretty old and high-time frames, the ex-Korean aircraft (#188 & 199) didn't have that many hours. AFAIK, only #292, an early 80s ex-Swiss aircraft went on to World while the others were stored when TZ ceased operations.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-31 10:49:46 and read 3841 times.

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 62):
The majority of bankrupt and gone carriers didn't fly either or just flew one of the type just some off the top of my head

Aero Peru - DC-10

In addition to 3 ex-Mexicana DC-10-15s briefly operated in the 1990s, AeroPeru also operated 3 L-1011s. They were the first operator of PSA's 2 L-1011s which PSA removed from service after less than one year's service in 1974/75. They were totally unsuitable for PSA's shorthaul commuter network in California. The L-1011s spent a long period (at least a couple of years) stored in the desert. Nobody wanted them due to their unique lower-deck lounge. AeroPeru finally leased them for a while in the late 1970s and early '80s. They also leased another ex-Eastern L-1011 for a while in the 1990s.

The other 3 L-1011s ordered by PSA were cancelled before delivery and went to LTU in Germany.

The 2 ex-PSA aircraft.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Howard Chaloner
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vito Cedrini

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: olddominion727
Posted 2012-12-31 12:43:26 and read 3722 times.

@YYZ717, I saw the DC10 in LAX quite a bit... so it may have been purchased for the LON run, but I know it was used to LAX for the cargo capacity as well.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: dtw9
Posted 2012-12-31 12:56:52 and read 3701 times.

These are the original news articles from Flight International regarding the Delta order for DC-10's plus the transfer to United in 1972.

Delta Airlines, the US domestic operatorwith 25 TriStars on order, struck abitter blow at the hopes of Lockheed
and Rolls-Royce on March 18 when itannounced an order for five McDonnellDouglas DC-lOs and options on a
further three. The airline is in ahealthy financial state (it declared a$40 million profit during 1970) and since news of the Rolls-Royce debacle first broke had been regarded as theleast committed of the TriStar customers.
Advance payments on itsTriStars amount to $34 m i l l i on(£14-2 million), compared with about
$100 million (£41-7 million) which TWA has invested. Delta has taken out an insurance policy by ordering the
DC-lOs, which will be delivered between the autumn of 1972 and early in1973. At a cost of around $15 million
(£6-25 million) apiece, they will ensure its competitive position. Delta's first TriStar was due to be delivered
at the end of this year.Lockheed has not finally lost out on the deal because the Delta contract
with them is being maintained and the airline is continuing with the discussions over the engine problem.
Eastern Airlines, which has 37 TriStarson order, has publicly affirmed its faith in the aircraft, and consequently
in Lockheed, in a statementlast Friday.

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/1971.html

DELTA STAYS WITH TRISTAR
RIGHTS held by Delta to buy five DC-lOs, worth $90million, from McDonnell Douglas have been transferred to
United. The agreement—reached on June 5—is subject to CAB approval and is such that upon delivery to United the
aircraft will be leased immediately to Delta for about two and-a-half years. Delta will operate the DC-lOs until
deliveries of its Lockheed TriStars are well under way.According to Edward E. Carlson, president of United,
purchase of the DC-lOs will not require new financing arrangements to be made. David C. Garrett, president of
Delta, notes that the DC-lOs were ordered a year ago"primarily as protection against delay in delivery of the
TriStars." He says: "Since Lockheed's financial problems now appear solved, Delta will continue with its intention
to buy 24."The five DC-lOs will be delivered in Delta colours. One will be received in October of this year, two in November and two early in 1973. All the aircraft will be returned to United in April and May 1975.
United recently exercised its only remaining options tobuy seven DClOs. By the end of this summer the company will have 15 in scheduled service, with 22 to follow over the next three years. This will bring United's DC-10 fleet
to a total of 37, which compares with its original order for30, plus 30 options.

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/1972.html

Again, there is more to this then we will ever know. A paragraph from another Flight International article at the time the DC-10 started revenue service states:

"The eight orders which United dropped were made up by Delta, which signed a "letter of intent" with McDonnell Douglas covering five orders and three options. Delta was of course insuring itself against the possible collapse ofthe TriStar. The airline was the most doubtful of the TriStar customers from the Lockheed/Rolls-Royce point ofview, and had voiced its doubts about the aircraft in public soon after the Rolls-Royce collapse. But it was the only airline actually to shift its allegiance, if only in part, to the other side. With the TriStar situation brighter the future of the Delta DC-IOs must remain in doubt; no airline could welcome the prospect of a fleet incorporating three wide-body types."

Just seems strange that United cancels 8 DC-10's and Delta then picks up these 8 slots. Then, within a year United gets these 8 slots back through a lease agreement with Delta. What I would like to know is, who's specs were these five jets built to, Delta's or United's?

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-31 13:07:38 and read 3660 times.

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 71):
What I would like to know is, who's specs were these five jets built to, Delta's or United's?

I've read that they were identical to the rest of UA's DC-10-10s.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-31 13:20:31 and read 3633 times.

Don't forget that only the 5 firm orders were ever delivered to DL......I wonder if the options went back to UA along with the 5 a/c?


According to the history book mentioned earlier (the authors had complete access to DL's files) once the Lockheed/RR problem was settled, DL transferred the purchase rights to the FIVE to UA and, of course, then leased them back. From what I can gather, UA had ordered their initial batch in '68........I believe it was 24. DL's BOD made the decision to order the DC-10s in '71, right in the middle of the Lockheed/RR mess. That was straightened out soon after that, because the lease back deal was done before DL took delivery of the 10s in late '72.



Perhaps, when UA cancelled part of their order and DL got wind of it, coincidentally, at the right time when they were looking for the 10s.


As far as whose specs they were built to, I couldn't tell you. I wonder if they had time before delivery and after the deal with UA to get any possible specs changed?

[Edited 2012-12-31 13:25:05]

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: dtw9
Posted 2012-12-31 13:33:31 and read 3612 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 73):

Don't forget that only the 5 firm orders were ever delivered to DL......I wonder if the options went back to UA along with the 5 a/c?

United firmed up the three options on Dec 1 1971. So again this whole thing is strange because United cancelled 8 DC-10's in Jan 1971, Delta takes up all 8 as orders or options under a letter of intent in March 1971. Then in June 1972 Delta transfers purchase rights to United and takes delivery four months later of DC-10's built to United specs. So the question is, why did United firm the options in Dec 1971, fully six months before the deal with Delta to take the purchase rights on the other five?

[Edited 2012-12-31 13:41:26]

[Edited 2012-12-31 13:42:52]

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TrijetsRMissed
Posted 2012-12-31 13:54:32 and read 3566 times.

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 63):
At the time, Frank Borman said the engine commonality was a significant factor. I forget the exact words, but it was something to the effect that "people ask me why we took on the DC-10 .... " and he responded with the engine info.

I don't doubt that. There had to be a positive spin to the shareholders for adding another fleet type... But the engine commonality of the DC-10 did not outweigh the overall commonality of the Tristar 500 with existing L-1011 fleet. Especially when you consider that only two of DC-10s were operated for multiple years. (The third was picked up by CO within a year).

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 63):
She said cabin crew loved working on the DC-10s, because everything functioned well. I love the L1011-500, but I'd be curious as to whether the Tristar's reputation for needing extra tender loving care on its complicated systems factored in to EA's decision making. People who worked on both the standard and the -500 model say that they really were two distinct types in terms of systems, cockpit, etc., so the benefits of commonality may not have been so great as they would appear.

CF-CPI, I'm one of the biggest proponents of the DC-10 on here. Generally, the -500 could not match the -30 in combined payload and range. I'm also aware of the -500's upgrades (I worked in the industry when the US tarmacs were crowded with L1011s). That said, the -500 would have been a better option for EA. And to accomplish that, the MD-82 should have been ordered instead of the 757. That's my opinion.

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 62):
There's more to the Delta order then we will ever know.

dtw9, believe what you want. Flightglobal's archives are a great source - for what was made available to the press, anyway.

The truth is, prior to Lockheed's production ramp-up, DL made arrangements with McDonnell Douglas in reserving a minimum for 25 delivery slots for the DC-10. This was understood by both sides as a PLAN B and conditional on Lockheed breaching DL's contract by way of missing SLA deadlines.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TZTriStar500
Posted 2012-12-31 14:04:20 and read 3550 times.

Quoting DouglasDC10 (Reply 68):
However, compared to other DC-10s and late L-1011s they were still pretty young, offered better range than the L-1011 fleet and were relatively cheap when few used A340/330-300 and 777-200/-200ER were on the market. They were #183/184/187/188/199 and 292. While the ex-Swissair aircraft were pretty old and high-time frames, the ex-Korean aircraft (#188 & 199) didn't have that many hours. AFAIK, only #292, an early 80s ex-Swiss aircraft went on to World while the others were stored when TZ ceased operations.

The 3 L-1011-500s we had left at the time where all actually younger than any of the DC-10-30s acquired being built in 1982. You are correct that -30s 188, 199, and 292 had low cycles, but the main reason for the DC-10-30 acquisition was exponentially increasingly maintenance and reliability difficulties with the L-1011 being an orphan fleet with virtually no spares and MRO support dwindling. While the DC-10 was NOT an optimal choice, it was the only one that made economic sense at the time as the preferred L-1011 replacement was the 767 and with lease rates over $600K/month in 2006, it was a non-starter for AMC ops. TZ paid the price for waiting too long to replace the widebody fleet in the only profitable side of its business and this was a contributing factor to its demise with no real direct connection to the aircraft choice as WO and Omni successfully flew DC-10-30s for the AMC as well. Had it worked, the L-1011s would have been gone by the end of 2008 and we would have had 5-6 DC-10-30s operational as the plan was temporary for 5 years until 767 lease rates came down.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: TrijetsRMissed
Posted 2012-12-31 14:15:25 and read 3513 times.

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 74):
So the question is, why did United firm the options in Dec 1971, fully six months before the deal with Delta to take the purchase rights on the other five?

I think it's academic. UA's initial order was 30+30. Like AA, UA had every intent of eventually operating over 50 DC-10s. It was just a matter of cash flow and expansion dictating when they would be delivered. IIRC, some of these options from 1968 were not delivered until 1980..

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: dtw9
Posted 2012-12-31 14:23:49 and read 3483 times.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 75):
dtw9, believe what you want. Flightglobal's archives are a great source - for what was made available to the press, anyway.

The truth is, prior to Lockheed's production ramp-up, DL made arrangements with McDonnell Douglas in reserving a minimum for 25 delivery slots for the DC-10. This was understood by both sides as a PLAN B and conditional on Lockheed breaching DL's contract by way of missing SLA deadlines.



This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say there was more to the story then what we knew at the time. Up until now,this is the first I've ever heard of a minimum of 25 delivery positions for Delta. I'm not doubting it at all.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: mayor
Posted 2012-12-31 14:56:30 and read 3425 times.

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 78):

Was Flightglobal even in existence when all this transpired? If not, WHERE did they get their archived info from?

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: dtw9
Posted 2012-12-31 15:21:09 and read 3395 times.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 77):
IIRC, some of these options from 1968 were not delivered until 1980..



All of United's options had expired with the last conversion to firm order in May 1972 for 7 aircraft, which were all delivered by 1975. After further research the 3 options that Delta held were also allowed to expire along with 20 others in 1971,15 in January and 5 in July. So at the time of first delivery in July 1971, United had 22 firm orders plus 10 options. Add into that the five taken from Delta gave United a fleet of 37 at the end of 1975. United went on to buy two more batches of 5 each in April 1978 and May 1979. One other thing I never realized was that there was never a N1840U in the DC-10 registration sequence.

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: dtw9
Posted 2012-12-31 15:25:52 and read 3388 times.

Quoting mayor (Reply 79):
Was Flightglobal even in existence when all this transpired? If not, WHERE did they get their archived info from?

They were called Flight International

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-01-01 08:51:13 and read 3065 times.

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 81):
They were called Flight International

Flightglobal is the on-line, very young sister of this weekly magazine.

Flight Internatuional was first published in 1909. It is the world's oldest aviation magazine. It is published weekly in the UK by Reed Business Information.

Flightglobal was established in February 2006 and is the web site of Flight International and its sister publications Airline Business, ACAS and Air Transport Intelligence (ATI).

Flightglobal has a picture library of over a million images which are most if not all of the images published in Flight International over more than a century.

Here is a link to the flightglobal archive of the Flight International magazine:

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/

Topic: RE: Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake?
Username: SPaceshipDC10
Posted 2013-01-01 09:02:24 and read 3050 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 69):
In addition to 3 ex-Mexicana DC-10-15s briefly operated in the 1990s, AeroPeru also operated 3 L-1011s

And a DC-10-30 in basic Canadian livery.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/