F4N From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (13 years 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2567 times:
I was recently reading a small article about the L1011 in one of the popular British a/c modelling magazines and was surprised at how few carriers operated this a/c as a freighter, especially considering how successful the trijets from MD were in this category. Any thoughts or comments as to why?
I don't recall if Lockheed even offered the L1011 as a new-build F.
KFRG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2536 times:
All L1011 Freighters were -200's, with the exception of a single -100. The fact is the DC-10 was a superior aircraft in the Freighter category. The -10 could carry a heavier payload, and fly further than the 1011. MD at the time also offered pure -10 freighters, which may have also swayed sales.
SAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2465 times:
Ten -200s were converted by Marshall Aerospace (who also did the RAF Tanker/Freighters); the other (a -1 'lead sled' and not a -100 as KERG said) was done by Pemco who completely messed it up - cost a lot of money to be fixed by Lockheed!
The operators of the L1011 freighters are:
Kitty Hawk International (5 in storage at VCV)
Arrow Air (4, including 2 in storage at ROS - the other two are due to be parked within the next 60 days)
Lanta Aviation (aka Caribjet) (1 at AMM, ex KHI)
TradeWinds Airlines (1, based at GSO)
The KHI birds are all ex BA; of the Arrow Air aircraft, three are ex Gulf Air and the fourth was from LTU. The TradeWinds -1 is ex Eastern.
Actually when you look at it the L1F is an excellent niche freighter with unbeatable economics with payloads in the 40 - 57 tonne range over 2500 - 3000 nm: it works out some 20% less than a DC10-30F.
Airlineguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 348 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (13 years 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2391 times:
Actually when you look at it the L1F is an excellent niche freighter with unbeatable economics with payloads in the 40 - 57 tonne range over 2500 - 3000 nm: it works out some 20% less than a DC10-30F. 20% less what???
How does it compair to the operating cost of the DC10-30F? Also, how much to aquire? I would think the L1011 could be picked up for much less then a DC10-30.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26978 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2361 times:
While the L-1011 might be very cheap to acquire, try supporting it for a while.
With nearly no spare support available around the world, this once fine aircraft is becomeing big liability.
The current largest L-1011 operator ATA, will this summer be reducing its fleet to a mere 6 examples (1x100, 5x500) as the dispatch reliability of this aircraft has become very poor. ATA has even had to cannabalise 3 aircraft parked in Victorville California to secure a steady source of spares.
The mighty L-10 is no more.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California