Tristarfreak From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 125 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 14282 times:
I love the L-1011 tristar (as you can see from my username) and my question is why were they retired from service so soon being that DL retired theirs when they were only 20 something years (pretty average age for an aircraft) and with ATA retiring their last ones this year for some DC-10s (which are probably older) and then you have UPS retiring their 721s this year which are from the 60's and then NW still flying DC-9s that are from the 60's as well and then the 1011s didn't even get a chance at being freighters (and they would make a great one too) and they were very advance aircraft for their time and still have some advanced features that are still being used on new aircraft today even though supplies were very limited you can still find them so does anybody have an explanation as to why they were retired so soon???
DAL767400ER From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, RR: 50 Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 14279 times:
Maintenance-intensive, 3-man cockpit, too many engines, and most importantly, too high fuel consumption. As sturdy and sleek the Tristars were, they also were heavy fuel guzzlers, which was the main reason they were retired rather young.
1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 5751 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 14266 times:
The L-1011 is a trijet, which is not as efficient as a twin. Efficiency is not the only issue with trijets, the third engine is more difficult for maintenance. For Delta, the 767-400 is a better aircraft. In addition to retiring their L-1011s, Delta has also retired their even younger MD-11s. The MD-11 was a nightmare for Delta, with high operating costs and frequent mechanical issues.
Also, remember that Lockheed is out of the commercial aviation industry, and parts for the L-1011 are now only available aftermarket, making them more difficult to come by. This is the reason why ATA is switching to the DC-10, as Boeing (who bought out McDonnell Douglas) still provides service for the DC-10.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 5751 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14010 times:
Well, ATA currently only operates the L-1011-500. But still, parts for the L-1011 family in general are becoming more and more difficult to come by, as Lockheed is out of the commercial aviation industry.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
I loved the L1011, it was a beautiful peice of machinery to look at. I never had a chance to fly on one. I wish more had been built and that more were still around, but Lockheed's poor timing with initial rollout just weeks after the debut of the DC-10 in the early seventies sealed its fate. Even if it had been received by airlines and the public as the superior airplane that it was, September 11, 2001 and the recession and industry stagnation that followed would have done away with the L1011 just the same as it did the rest of the tri-jet fleet in the United States.
Opinions expressed by "iflyswa" are not those of Southwest Airlines Officers, Directors, or Employees.
ReidYYZ From Kyrgyzstan, joined Sep 2005, 536 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 13839 times:
Quoting Warreng24 (Reply 5): Apparantly is is very very difficult to get spare parts for this first generation version.
True, but even worse was a problem finding an overhaul shop. RR sold off all their tooling for Tristar model engines. Shops equiped for the task are far and few in between. Even some system components are hard to come by. Sure you could go out and buy a desert queen for the parts, but if you are facing a common problem with a specific component, chances are the desert queen part is not much better. Many years ago, I heard an operator had a problem with the flex fuel line feeding engine 2 aft of the bulkhead. The OEM still managed to have the drawings and tooling to fabricate, conditional that XX number of units were to be bought. Well, said company bought the req'd number since they had a few Tristars, and ended up replacing more. The rest of stock ended up getting sold off slowly as other companies needed them. And as a sole source (OEM not into stocking them) the original operator made some cash above and beyond what they spent initially.
VC10DC10 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 959 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 13777 times:
Quoting Africawings (Reply 10): What about re-engnging these things with more fuel efficint ones?
Not as easy as it sounds... not only do you have to consider the high cost of modern engines, you would probably have to deal with different weights and loadings on the wing, changing the fore-and-aft trim of the plane (thanks to the rear engine), adapting fuel and electrical systems, avionics, etc. Pretty soon you're talking real money.
AADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1831 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13521 times:
The general rule of thumb for mainline commercial aircraft is that they are designed to be operated for 25 years. There is some give or take depending on the number of cycles, quality of maintenance and other usage factors. Cargo aircraft can operate for much longer since they make fewer flights and have fewer safety requirements.
The L-1011 was dropped a little faster than some other types as previously mentioned due to Lockheed exiting the business, but their lifespan was not really abnormally short, it is just that few companies are really dragging their lifespan out to the very end.
Leskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 72 Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13426 times:
Quoting Superfly (Reply 16): Tristarfreak:
Man you missed out! Big grin
I flew on a Delta L-1011 (LAX-ATL) waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in Nineteen Eighty Niiiiiiiiiiine. old
You think you're old? ... I flew on a DL L1011 LAX-ATL and on another a couple days after that, MCO-LAX... and that was in 1982... ... and I flew on yet another two of them, this time with LT, in 1986, that was DUS-LEI-DUS... and, yes, I am old enough to remember those flights quite well...
They were nice - but, to be honest, I still prefer the planes that are built today.
BPS3458 From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 520 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 13413 times:
Bit off the topic but believe my only flight on a L-1011 was sometime in 1987 or 88 flying DL from Frankfurt nonstop in to Dallas. Is my memory correct and did DL serve FRA - DFW nonstop with a L-1011 during that time ?