Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Weights On This Tanker DC-10  
User currently offlinec5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3841 times:

Noticing the photo of this DC-10 tanker, I saw that the center bogie has been removed to provide for the tanks. DC-10s needed that bogie for support, so did they strengthen the main gear? Does it ever takeoff at MTOW, b/c if it doesn't would be a need for that center bogie to begine with?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Nicholas Vollaro




"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 3546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3816 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'd suggest that the tanks are removable and that the center gear has been retracted & disabled vs removed.


Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3816 times:

There is no need for the center line gear as the takeoff weights are much lower than a standard DC-10-30.

Remember, the interior has been removed, its carrying no cargo and it would have a very light fuel load.


User currently offlinec5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3785 times:

Quoting 474218 (Reply 2):
Remember, the interior has been removed, its carrying no cargo and it would have a very light fuel load.

Will it ever carry cargo? I only ask b/c it's seems like kind of a waste of a large airplane just for the water tanks. Or, as ZANL188 said, can the tanks be removed and operate as a normal cargo plane?



"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlinekl671 From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3782 times:

Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
DC-10s needed that bogie for support

The tanker that you referenced is a modified DC10 -!0 and as delivered did not have the centre bogie. Only the -30 and -40 series DC10s were equipped with the extra gear.

http://www.air-and-space.com/DC-10%20Tanker%20Air%20Carrier.htm

Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
Does it ever takeoff at MTOW

Probably every time. Fire tankers are based as close to the fire as they can reasonably get. Thus they are fuellled with the minimum load required to complete the mission. The water/fire retardant tanks are then filled till the aircraft MTOW is reached.
Swapping range for load.


User currently offlinedtw9 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1165 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3744 times:

Quoting kl671 (Reply 4):
The tanker that you referenced is a modified DC10 -!0 and as delivered did not have the centre bogie.

910 is a series 10. The above photo shows 911, which is a series 30


User currently offlineTZTriStar500 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1453 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3741 times:

Quoting c5load (Reply 3):

Will it ever carry cargo? I only ask b/c it's seems like kind of a waste of a large airplane just for the water tanks. Or, as ZANL188 said, can the tanks be removed and operate as a normal cargo plane?

Its not a cargo configured aircraft and does not have a main deck cargo door. The aircraft's payload capability is simply being used to carry an external load via retardant tanks rather than internally which is enhanced with the interior removed and any other non-essential items. This is a permanent conversion and the center gear has most-likely been removed to save weight, not just locked up. The aircraft have been modified by STC ST01870LA.

Quoting kl671 (Reply 4):
The tanker that you referenced is a modified DC10 -!0 and as delivered did not have the centre bogie. Only the -30 and -40 series DC10s were equipped with the extra gear.

http://www.air-and-space.com/DC-10%2...r.htm

You are talking about the original aircraft Tanker 910 which is a DC-10-10. Tanker 911 is a -30 with the center gear removed. The -30 is capable of being operated without the center gear, but at reduced weights. However, even with the center gear removed, the -30 has greater payload capability than the -10.

Quoting kl671 (Reply 4):
Probably every time. Fire tankers are based as close to the fire as they can reasonably get. Thus they are fuellled with the minimum load required to complete the mission. The water/fire retardant tanks are then filled till the aircraft MTOW is reached.
Swapping range for load.

In the case of Tanker 911, the MTOW of a standard DC-10-30 is never reached as the center gear is removed, but the reduced MTOW may be. This aircraft S/N 57957 is eligible for a 572K MTOW, but according to page 10 of the TCDS A22WE http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory...0a862575d1006f7449/$FILE/A22WE.pdf the MTOW is reduced to 475K with the center gear retracted.

[Edited 2010-06-08 20:06:46]

[Edited 2010-06-08 20:20:00]


35 years of American Trans Air/ATA Airlines, 1973-2008. A great little airline that will not be soon forgotten.
User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3695 times:

Quoting c5load (Reply 3):

Will it ever carry cargo?

Don't think so, unless its stuff related to the fire mission, because with this barren interior I don't see any provisions for carrying pallets and such.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Matthew C. Lyons



User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25633 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3473 times:

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 5):
Quoting kl671 (Reply 4):
The tanker that you referenced is a modified DC10 -!0 and as delivered did not have the centre bogie.

910 is a series 10. The above photo shows 911, which is a series 30

The DC-10-30 in the photo was originally delivered to Finnair in 1975. After about 20 years with Finnair, it then spent a couple of years with defunct French carrier Air Liberte, then about 5 years with Continental, followed by another 5 years or so with Omni.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Juhani Sipilä
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joe Pries - ATR Team


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jonathan Derden - Jetwash Images



User currently offlineex52tech From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 559 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3458 times:

Quoting kl671 (Reply 4):
Probably every time. Fire tankers are based as close to the fire as they can reasonably get. Thus they are fuellled with the minimum load required to complete the mission. The water/fire retardant tanks are then filled till the aircraft MTOW is reached.
Swapping range for load.

I can't imagine that they takeoff even close to MTOW due to the proximity to the fire and you would not want to fly that airplane low and slow that heavy.



"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
User currently offlinekl671 From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3424 times:

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 5):
910 is a series 10. The above photo shows 911, which is a series 30
Quoting TZTriStar500 (Reply 6):
You are talking about the original aircraft Tanker 910 which is a DC-10-10. Tanker 911 is a -30 with the center gear removed.

oops. I don't know how I managed to confuse the two aircraft. It is certainly not because the tail numbers are difficult to read.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Weights On This Tanker DC-10
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What's This Little Door On The DC-10? posted Mon May 2 2005 01:11:49 by Starlionblue
Is This Normal On A DC-10, I Don't Think So! posted Sat May 20 2000 10:02:27 by Aer Lingus
If The No. 2 Engine On A DC-10 Fires Up... posted Tue Nov 11 2008 21:08:20 by Triebwerk
CF6-6 Engine On DC-10... Why The Weird Cone? posted Tue Mar 4 2008 08:11:31 by BR715-A1-30
Rear Cargo Door On DC-10/MD-11 posted Wed Jan 31 2007 19:34:47 by Someone83
Fadec Or EEC On DC-10-30? posted Sat Nov 11 2006 01:50:47 by MD11Fanatic
Open Panel On The Port Side On The DC-10 posted Wed Jan 12 2005 17:00:13 by Alphafloor
Pics Of A Couple Of DC-10 Accidents This Month posted Fri Apr 30 2004 08:50:33 by DC-10Tech
That Opening/hole On A DC-10 posted Wed Jun 18 2003 09:35:41 by Pizzapolli
FedEX DC-10 Blows 8 Main Tires On Landing? posted Fri Aug 23 2002 19:08:14 by Mr Spaceman

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format