Mason From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 749 posts, RR: 1 Posted (15 years 4 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2562 times:
Is it just me, or did the DC-10 out-last the L-1011? TWA, along with Cathay Pacific, Air Canada, and many other smaller carriers have already retired their L-1011 fleet, while United, Northwest, American, etc... still operate large fleets of DC-10s. I know Northwest has some pretty old ones that still fly the longer routes (SEA-KIX, AMS-SEA). Does NWA, UA, or AA have any plans to retire their aging DC-10s in the near future? I never cared for the L-1011; its the ugliest thing I have ever seen. I know some people out there would like to sleep with it if they could. It's kind of a love or hate thing.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7875 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (15 years 4 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2375 times:
United and American are both in the process of retiring their -10's. Between the 2 airlines there are about 25 left. Most of which are destined for Fedex and the MD-10 treatment. Northwest plans on keeping its -10's... they still have around 50. Though UA also has 4 DC-10-30CF's that operate in the United Worldwide Cargo livery which should still be hauling cargo for sometime.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Copper1 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 439 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (15 years 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2287 times:
I hope both types soldier on for many years to come. I love the look and the sound of both of the big " three holers " . To me they are both from the golden era of passenger jet aircraft. The designers thought outside the box on both. Today's designs, while efficient, lack creative flare. The natural consequence I suppose of having only two major builders who see a need to go head to head in every category.
Meyrowings From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (15 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2235 times:
In General, the DC-10 sold better than the L-1011, so there are more "out there".
I´ve been to FRA quite often recently. There is a regular flight on a 1011 (Think it´s cargo or charter). The -10´s seem to be used as "Backup" more oftenly, when there´s no MD-11, 777, 767-ER or Airbus 330/340 available (Suggestion)?
The main disadvantages of the 1011 were - as You should know - the delay on RB-211 introduction and the quick MDD Follow-Ups with 3rd main gear and higher weight=fuel capacity=range. The 1011-500 was shortened for longer range to decrease weight instead of strengthened parts for higher weight.
Assumption: Keep a DC-10 as "general-purpose-backup".
Na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 11294 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2095 times:
The DC-10 seems to pe a perfect aircraft for freight-transport. That Fedex converts a lot to MD-10s makes it sure that you can expect a lot of them still flying well into the next decade. Though there´s no widebody with a higher accident rate, the DC-10 seems to be a very robust type in the long term.
The L-1011 will be gone forever soon. There´s only one major airline using them still - Delta - and they will get rid of them by 2003.
ZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5586 posts, RR: 33
Reply 8, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2089 times:
To Mason: It is of course a matter of taste. I don't like the 1011 either (not as an aircraft but to look at it) because it looks so unnaturaly heavy at the rear.
I think both planes were very economical at their time. Swissair for example loved the DC 10 very much, it was a cash cow. They only got ride of them because they always want to have young fleet. The same is happening with the MD 11 in the next years
Chucknsteph From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2067 times:
Well, both aircraft are getting rather old. While only around 250 or so 1011's were built, they hung around despite that. My point to that is, parts. An airline doesnt like the feeling of running short of parts. The 1011 and -10 were very competitive in their time. The downfall to the 1011 I beleive is that they only contracted to one engine manufacturer; RollRoyce, which was and still is an excellent motor, but Lockheed should have opened the doors. They forgot that they were building the plane for airplane operators in stead of engine manufactures. I personally favor the good ol' 1011 over the -10. But I still will never turn down the -10 workhoarse. Both aircraft paved the way for medium/long range wide bodies and engine performance/economics.