BAJMowiec
Topic Author
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 9:34 pm

A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Fri Sep 05, 2003 8:47 pm

Hey!

I'm sure that I was, and am, not the only person to be sad to see the MD-11 go out of production,and service with some airlines. Well, I was wondering, did anyone in here hear of an replacement tri-jet that MD or Boeing are planning? I know there was the MD-11XX, a better version, stretched version of the plane, which was planned to compete with some Airbus aircraft, unfortunately, the model never entered production. If anyone has any info, or thoughts,I'd gladly read them. The MD-11 always was one of my favorite planes out there ....
 
Guest

RE: A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Fri Sep 05, 2003 9:05 pm

MD-11 was a maintenance pig. With today's technology, there is no need for a tri-jet aircraft.
 
eham
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:00 pm

RE: A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Fri Sep 05, 2003 9:41 pm

it's sad that the MD-11 is leaving so much airlines at the moment, I'm lucky Amsterdam is my home-airport !! We have plenty of MD-11 movements every day: KLM and Martinair  Smile/happy/getting dizzy I don't think there will be another tri-jet in production anymore. With todays technology 2 engine planes are cheaper to operate than the tri-jets.

But again...it's a shame that a beauty like the MD-11 received not that response it deserved  Crying
 
BeltwayBandit
Posts: 474
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 4:25 am

RE: A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Fri Sep 05, 2003 10:02 pm

Not a chance. Why do with 3 engines what can be done with 2? And with Airbus and Boeing struggling to find customers for their widebodies, why would anyone else enter the market?

PS: McD Douglas is not planning anything anymore. The company does not exist. It was absorbed by Boeing several years ago.
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Fri Sep 05, 2003 10:24 pm

The DC-10 and L-1011 had the most powerful engines of its day - even more powerful, I believe, than the engines of a 747. If you wanted to build a plane about 3/4ths of the size of a 747, you had no choice but 3 or 4 engines, and logically, you could argue that 3 big engines are cheaper to maintain than 4 smaller ones. They didn't realize how much of a pain in the a$$ the center engine would be to maintain.

Now you have engines of up to 110,000-120,000 lbs of thrust, and it's likely they could go still higher. The 2-engine, underwing layout has definately won out over all other configurations for large jets, unless you go the 4-engined route for whatever reasons (like ETOPS). It sure is a pity, because it's pretty boring for spotters.

Charles
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Sat Sep 06, 2003 4:35 am

MD-11 replacements:

A330
A340
A380
B777
B747
B7E7
Enough said.
 
tokolosh
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 7:02 pm

RE: A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Sun Sep 07, 2003 2:11 am

Personally I found the MD 11 a nice plane to fly in (also the DC 10 for that matter). The cabin was quieter than a 747 and all the landings I had were very soft. Boeing killed MD 11 production, putting the cap on 200 planes. What a shame. They are strong planes and that's why they are so popular as cargo conversions. DC-8's as well.
Did the chicken or the egg get laid first?
 
HlywdCatft
Posts: 5232
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:21 am

RE: A Possible Replacement For The MD-11.

Sun Sep 07, 2003 2:18 am

I think Boeing should have kept the MD-11 line for cargo production only.