G500
Posts: 1252
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:45 pm

The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:55 pm

to the un-trained eye it's pratically the same airplane, but their reputation (DC10, MD11) is VERY different.

From day one the DC10 had many critics, but haven't read anything bad about the MD11, execpt that is tricky to land. Seems like companies were/are happy with the MD11's performance and reliability

what's the story
 
Gingersnap
Posts: 823
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:09 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:04 pm

I thought it was the other way round personally.
Flown on: A306 A319/20/21 A332 B732/3/4/5/7/8 B742/4 B752 B762/3 B772/W C152 E195 F70/100 MD-82 Q400
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:10 pm

http://www.airlinesafety.com/faq/faq9.htm
Give some history of this aircraft, which it claims is a failure in the first sentence.
sites.google.com/site/unitedfleetsite/
 
mogandoCI
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 2:39 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:11 pm

1. The MD-11 sold just 200 copies.

2. MD needed a performance improvement package after the plane spectacularly failed to reach initial payload-range promises. DL's planes can't do westbound LAX-HKG reliably.

3. MD-11 is plagued by accidents, including Mandarin Airlines at HKG in late 90s and FedEx at NRT just a few years ago.

4. The MD-11 was the last twin-aisle plane the company made before it finally had to sell itself to Boeing and be relegated to the dust heap of history. It's also the last 3-engine large commercial jet made of any manufacturer because it arrived at the dawn of the transpacific ETOPS age.

None of that sounds like "success" to me.
 
cargolex
Posts: 1201
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:20 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:11 pm

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
Seems like companies were/are happy with the MD11's performance and reliability

That's not really the case. The MD-11 missed it's performance goals by quite a bit, prompting some cancellations (Singapore Airlines) and, ultimately, the en-masse re-purposing of the MD-11 as primarily a cargo plane - a mission for which it is better suited than hauling passengers in today's market.

The MD-11 was also severely undercut by the evolution of big twins and ETOPS. By 1997, it had virtually no future other than as a freighter.

Only a handful of operators stuck by the MD-11 after 2001, and today only KLM and World Airways are flying them in pax configuration.

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
From day one the DC10 had many critics

The DC-10 had many critics because of real and perceived safety problems, owing to several really serious crashes in the 1970s. Ultimately, it's not an unsafe plane, but the damage was done in terms of the public perception. My parents, who lived in Chicago in 1979, never wanted to fly a DC-10 after that, even though we know today that part of the immediate causes of the AA crash were due to maintenance and procedures, not the plane itself. The public largely agreed with them for a long time. The DC-10 seemed to have a perpetual cloud hanging over it in the eyes of the public, and that really hurt the program and the company perception-wise.

The DC-10 program was definitely a success as a whole - although it would have done much better if Lockheed and MD hadn't been aiming two large arrows at the very same slice of the pie, meaning that neither could really take a commanding lead in that market.

The L-1011 was technologically the superior plane, but the DC-10 did the job better - particularly when it came to hauling freight.

I wouldn't argue that the MD-11 was a failure, but it wasn't very successful either. Better range and more refinement might have allowed it to do better, but once it fell so far short of the initial goals, there wasn't much left to be done to refine it. MD lacked the resources to do a clean-sheet design by then and if they'd reworked it, it would have fallen victim to the 777 and A330, just like the A340 did.

The DC-10, with more than 400 built, ultimately has to be counted as a success.

[Edited 2012-02-14 08:14:33]
 
drerx7
Posts: 4203
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:19 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:11 pm

Yeah, the dc10 was the sales success, it just had a early spotty safety record
Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
 
G500
Posts: 1252
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:45 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:12 pm

Quoting Gingersnap (Reply 1):
I thought it was the other way round personally.

this article is pretty old but articles like this one are not hard to find

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...lines-dc-10-aviation-experts-crash
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:15 pm

Quoting Gingersnap (Reply 1):
I thought it was the other way round personally.

Both aircraft had their share of difficulties, but the MD-11's have been more enduring.

After an extremely rocky first decade, the DC-10 eventually matured into a safe and reliable medium-haul widebody for both passengers and cargo. It had certain isolated design flaws which were either fixed or worked around by the early '80s.

The MD-11 had a horrendous entry into service, missing fuel burn targets by as much as 8%. MD made up that shortfall within a couple of years, but the type nevertheless quickly fell out of favor as a passenger aircraft because of poor fuel burn compared to the competition (A343 and eventually 772ER). Even worse, it has a much worse safety record than any other airliner of its generation. Several factors contribute to this. The biggest is an outdated wing not much changed from that of the DC-10, when both Boeing and Airbus introduced brand-new, state-of-the-art wings on their MD-11 competitors. The stabilizer design is also poorly thought through, and other design quirks that were acceptable in the '70s proved problematic in the '90s.
 
AAIL86
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:00 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:17 pm

"Both aircraft had their share of difficulties, but the MD-11's have been more enduring"

Disagree with you there.


While the DC-10 was involved in some famous incidents, most of the airlines that operated it ended up getting the full service life out of their frames. Outside of KLM and Finnair, the same really can't be said for the MD-11. Delta and American both ordered large fleets of them and ended up retiring them very early. Some factor in that decision by DL and AA can be placed on the success of the 777, however it certainly seems to me that the lack of dispatch reliability certainly contributed to their decision to retire it early.
Personally, I would argue that the DC-10 program was generally a success, while the MD-11 was not.

[Edited 2012-02-14 08:19:16]
Next
 
northstardc4m
Posts: 2724
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:18 pm

They both got bad starts for different reasons:

DC-10= Problems with early GE CF6 engines caused poor dispatch rate early on. Cargo door problems leading to infamous THY crash in Ermondville, France; Then a few years later the crash of AA191 (due to maintenance granted but not known then) leading to the grounding of the type... both put the DC-10 in the wrong public light for most of the 70s. Add to that the very limited market and competition from the L1011 (with it's own problems) from the start limited sales. The press ate the DC-10 for lunch for much of the period and the black eye never faded.

MD-11= Very public row with American over early performance problems, Singapore canceled a large order over performance problems, delays with RR engine option, problems with PW44xx engine delivery rates, reduced orders by Thai and JAL over performance concerns... By the time the performance was up to delivery promises the A330/340 was in service and the 777 was coming fast.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
SASMD82
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:44 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:19 pm

If the A340 is perceived (among A-netters) to be very small succes, the MD-11 is definitely not a success.
- The A340 has had no fatal incidents yet (only 3 written offs and one crash)
- The MD-11 relatively have dealt with a lot of incidents

As far as I'm concerned, only KLM and Finnair have operated the MD-11 for a period of 15 years (or longer) without any problem. The only success the MD-11 it has, is that it appears to be a perfect cargo plane.

After the horrible start of the DC-10, it was quite succesful in the late 80s and 90s, wasn't it?
 
Clydenairways
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:27 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:19 pm

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
to the un-trained eye it's pratically the same airplane, but their reputation (DC10, MD11) is VERY different.

From day one the DC10 had many critics, but haven't read anything bad about the MD11, execpt that is tricky to land. Seems like companies were/are happy with the MD11's performance and reliability

what's the story

You got that the wrong way round. The DC10 did have some bad press in the early years but went on to have a long successful career.
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:56 pm

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 3):
3. MD-11 is plagued by accidents, including Mandarin Airlines at HKG in late 90s and FedEx at NRT just a few years ago.

Not to mention the SR111 crash.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:05 pm

Quoting AAIL86 (Reply 8):
"Both aircraft had their share of difficulties, but the MD-11's have been more enduring"

Disagree with you there.

Sorry for the lack of clarity. That was intended to mean that the MD-11's difficulties have been more enduring.
 
phishphan70
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:23 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:29 pm

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 10):
- The A340 has had no fatal incidents yet (only 3 written offs and one crash)


Just a little Nit-Pick. Pretty sure the EY A-346 that jumped the chocks at TLS was fatal. Now i know that isn't an in-service crash, and it was a test pilot that was killed, but a fatal accident none the less.

And as everyone above has stated, the initial performance shortfall killed whatever success was possible with the MD. Yes, the 777 and 330 played a role in the downfall, but the perception of the MD-11 is of a dog that never even came close to being what it was suppose to be.
Having said that, there is nothing that sounds as good as sitting in the last 3 rows of coach with the #2 engine spooling up for takeoff.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8933
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:38 pm

Quoting phishphan70 (Reply 14):
Pretty sure the EY A-346 that jumped the chocks at TLS was fatal. Now i know that isn't an in-service crash, and it was a test pilot that was killed, but a fatal accident none the less.

I don't think it was; the only people on board were aviation engineers from Abu Dhabi (from GAMCO, I think) ; one or two was seriously injured, but none killed. No test pilot was on board.

The MD11 was, as fine an aircraft as it was in certain ways, a failure. It was built to a budget and certain shortcomings became clear during its time in service; the shorter tail combined with the longer body posed stability problems and as has been mentioned above, there were many serious incidents; some incidents of VERY heavy landings didn't make the press because they weren't fatal.
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:59 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 12):
Not to mention the SR111 crash.

Which wasn't so much the fault of the MD11 as it was the IFE equipment that it was equipped with.
PHX based
 
flyingalex
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:26 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 15):
I don't think it was; the only people on board were aviation engineers from Abu Dhabi (from GAMCO, I think) ; one or two was seriously injured, but none killed. No test pilot was on board.

4 seriously injured, 5 with minor injuries. No fatalities.

http://avherald.com/h?article=41176dfa&opt=0
Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
 
phishphan70
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:23 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:29 pm

Quoting kaitak (Reply 15):
Quoting flyingalex (Reply 17):

I stand corrected, happily! Always love hearing no one was killed when I had previously thought they were!
 
Jalap
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:25 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:04 pm

Quoting phishphan70 (Reply 14):

And as everyone above has stated, the initial performance shortfall killed whatever success was possible with the MD. Yes, the 777 and 330 played a role in the downfall,

The 330 and MD11 weren't competing in the early years, it was marketed as a medium range plane. The A340 was the only other plane in the MD11's playground.

As for initial performance problems, I also seem to remember that Swissair had serious complaints.
 
FX1816
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:02 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:44 pm

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 10):
As far as I'm concerned, only KLM and Finnair have operated the MD-11 for a period of 15 years (or longer) without any problem. The only success the MD-11 it has, is that it appears to be a perfect cargo plane.

As far as I'm concerned World Airways has operated the MD-11 for a period of 15 years of longer without any problems.

FX1816
 
SASMD82
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:44 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:46 pm

Quoting Jalap (Reply 19):
The 330 and MD11 weren't competing in the early years, it was marketed as a medium range plane. The A340 was the only other plane in the MD11's playground.

As for initial performance problems, I also seem to remember that Swissair had serious complaints

Correct, it was the B777 vs the MD-11 vs the A340. A couple of months ago I read an article (from the late 80s) that said that the MD-11 would become the best selling wide body ever. The A340 came from Airbus (at that time, the success of Airbus was very limited) and the B777 (the initial version is way not comparable to what the later -200ER/LR can do). the A330 at that time was not a long range aircraft.

Except for SR111, what were the problems that SR encountered? Why do KLM have no problems with the MD-11?
 
shankly
Posts: 1194
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 10:42 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:56 pm

Was it the AA crews that affectionately dubbed the MD-11 the Scud...because you didn't know where it was going to land

Have been lucky enough to have ridden in Delta, KLM and Finnair MD-11's and found it a fine aircraft to travel in, although compared to the modern twins and quads a little grating noise wise at the back.
L1011 - P F M
 
B777LRF
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:05 pm

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 3):
4. The MD-11 was the last twin-aisle plane the company made before it finally had to sell itself to Boeing and be relegated to the dust heap of history. It's also the last 3-engine large commercial jet made of any manufacturer because it arrived at the dawn of the transpacific ETOPS age.

One small correction: MD bought Boeing using Boeing's money. Ref. Harry Stonecipher.
From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18821
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:24 pm

Quoting cargolex (Reply 4):
Only a handful of operators stuck by the MD-11 after 2001, and today only KLM and World Airways are flying them in pax configuration.

But it made an excellent freighter.

Quoting Mir (Reply 12):
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 3):
3. MD-11 is plagued by accidents, including Mandarin Airlines at HKG in late 90s and FedEx at NRT just a few years ago.

Not to mention the SR111 crash.
Quoting 777STL (Reply 16):
Quoting Mir (Reply 12):
Not to mention the SR111 crash.

Which wasn't so much the fault of the MD11 as it was the IFE equipment that it was equipped with.

Apart from SR111, which as mentioned had nothing to do with the aircraft, only 13 people (5 passengers, 8 crew) have been killed on MD-11s in over 21 years of service.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:37 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 24):
Apart from SR111, which as mentioned had nothing to do with the aircraft, only 13 people (5 passengers, 8 crew) have been killed on MD-11s in over 21 years of service.

Neither of the MD-11's primary competitors has ever experienced a fatality. More significantly (since fatalities in aviation are quite unpredictable), both have vastly lower accident rates, in both absolute and relative terms.
 
ghifty
Posts: 885
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:05 pm

Did the A340 really contribute to the MD-11/DC-10's demise? What was the A340's vs. MD-11/DC-10's SFC?
Fly Delta Jets
 
JHCRJ700
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:51 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:15 pm

Quoting Gingersnap (Reply 1):
I thought it was the other way round personally.

I thought the same thing when I read the title. As stated above me, the MD-11 didn't live up to it's promises, thus it didn't sell well.
RUSH
 
greggariouspdx
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 4:22 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:49 pm

By the early 1980's, the DC-10 had to be the most closely scrutinized passenger aircraft, so I never felt nervous flying on one. I flew many an AA and UA DC-10 and never had one delayed for maintenance issues. The same could not be said for my experience with the MD-11's. I remember many a delay in Miami, DFW, ORD, and, worst of all, a 7 hour delay in Shannon, Ireland while Delta mechanics chatted with Supervisors in Atlanta trying to figure out how to fix an engine. I also was on an AA MD-11 on the DFW-NRT route that had to divert to SEA for fuel. This reputation followed the MD-11 and the Swissair crash did it in.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5628
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:55 pm

The Dc10 had serious technical problems resulting in numerous fatal accidents.


So did the MD11.



The DC10 sold reasonable well.


I wouldn't call either a success.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
cchan
Posts: 951
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:04 am

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
but their reputation (DC10, MD11) is VERY different

Reputation and success are quite different in my view.

Success: D10 is more successful than M11. The D10 sold a lot more and as passenger aircrafts, they have been in longer service than the M11.

Reputation: D10 is more well known by the general public, M11 is almost unheard of by many people. Both don't have good reputation in terms of safety records compared to their main competing models at the time.

Quoting Gingersnap (Reply 1):
I thought it was the other way round personally.

Same here.
 
LGWflyer
Posts: 2233
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:38 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:09 am

Quoting cargolex (Reply 4):
today only KLM and World Airways are flying them in pax configuration.

What about Omni?
3 words... I Love Aviation!!!
 
cargolex
Posts: 1201
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:20 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:49 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 24):
But it made an excellent freighter.

No argument there. Until the launch of the 777LRF, there was a big gulf between the A306/B763 freighters and the 747-400F/ERF. The MD-11, available cheap as a conversion or only slightly more costly as a new-build, had a market to itself and that's why the conversion program was so popular. A huge percentage of the overall fleet was either built as or converted to freighters. I think more than 3/4s of total production ended up as freighters, with more than a quarter of total production being new build freighters or CF's (for MP) or Combis (for AZ, with the weird aft cargo door).

Quoting ghifty (Reply 26):
Did the A340 really contribute to the MD-11/DC-10's demise?

You can't pin the MD-11's poor sales entirely on the A340, because the A340 was also effected by the market forces that hurt the MD-11. But early on, it probably did have some impact.

Among other problems, the MD-11 fell far short of it's expected range goal, and that prompted some airlines to gravitate towards the A340 instead. SQ is the most obvious one because they literally cancelled their order and bought the A340 instead. I'm sure that was a blow to confidence in the MD-11 and might have turned off some prospective customers. We'll never know if Cathay considered replacing it's L-1011s with the MD-11 instead of the A330/A340. Could the SQ cancellation have been a factor? Hard to say the real impact.

SAS, a major MD customer, was a launch customer for the MD-11 but never firmed the order and ultimately bought the 767 and later the A330/A340.

Part of it was also just bad luck. Several operators who order the MD-11, Air Zaire, JAT, Minerve, Dragonair, Nigeria Airways, and BCal either ran out of money, got bought, ran into political trouble, or had serious other issues that led to cancellations.

And another part of it was just changing times. EIS for the MD-11 was in December of 1990 with Finnair. Only six and a half years later, the 777-200ER entered service with BA. That was probably the death knell for MD-11 pax sales, because here was a big twin that could do everything the MD-11 could do only cheaper and with fewer teething problems. The MD-11's early problems coupled with the rapid evolution of the market - which neither MD nor Airbus could have predicted in 1986 when both programs were in their early stages - meant that further orders that might have come down the pike if the 777 and A330 had not been there never came.

Quoting LGWflyer (Reply 31):

What about Omni?

Doesn't fly the MD-11 and is in the process of standardizing on the 767/777.
 
LGWflyer
Posts: 2233
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:38 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:54 am

Quoting cargolex (Reply 32):
Doesn't fly the MD-11

Of course sorry getting confused with the DC-10.
3 words... I Love Aviation!!!
 
dave2
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 1:58 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:55 am

The underlining problems was the DC-10 and the L-1011 going after the same market place. Started with AA putting out a specification in the late 1960s. Both McDonnell Douglas (MDC) and Lockheed marketing people were forecasting a need of 2,000 to 4,000 aircraft of this type. However, neither did well (the L-1011 worse off than MDC). The original AA specification called for a wide body with two engines carrying 200-300 passengers.

The DC-10 and L-1011 started off making sales but due to problems with the Rolls Royce engine on the L-1011, Lockheed nearly went bankrupt. The Government gave them a bail out and they did continue. The DC-10 appeared to be a snake bit airplane due to crashes including those caused by fault door latches (over 10 crashes). With the AA crash in 1980(?) at ORD did all tri-jet wide bodies in and orders disappeared fast - a few orders continued to come in. The USAF ordered 60 KC-10 helped some for MDC. The total DC-10s came to about 460. By the late 1970s, MDC wrote off the costs for the DC-10.

The L-1011 was less than 200. The DC-10 was built heavy duty and was seen as an ideal freighter and many have been used there and continue to (look at FedEx's fleet).

The MD-11 was a day late and a dollar short as the old saying goes. There was a need voiced by a number of airlines all ready using DC-10s about 1980 for a larger higher capacity but MDC did nothing till the late 1980s when the MD-11 was announced. By this time, Boeing had out the 767s and Airbus had the A300 and A310. The twins were all around more economical to operate. Also by the time MD-11 was started Boeing began on the 777 and that was the nail into the coffin for the MD-11. Yes, there were some MD-11 crashes too. One I remember clearly was the FedEx crash at EWR.

Yes, the L-1011 was more advanced technologically advanced that the DC-10 but by numbers sold, the DC-10 won. The MD-11 also found a calling as a freighter and is widely used that way now. I think KLM is the last MD-11 user that carries passengers still.

[Edited 2012-02-14 16:57:57]
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18821
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:06 am

Quoting dave2 (Reply 34):
The L-1011 was less than 200.

Total L-1011 production was 250.
 
HDA212
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:47 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:27 am

I would hardly call either a 'success'
 
ghifty
Posts: 885
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:53 am

I think the only objective definition of success is whether or not the product brought in more revenue than was spent on creating the profit, in other words if there is any net profit. "Sales projections" are subjective and can be skewed by the company producing the aircraft... the MD-11 is a derivative aircraft. It sold 200 frames. What was it's development cost?

Anybody can sit around and talk about the changes an air-frame brought about... look at Concorde. I surely doubt anybody would call that one a success (financially, anyways).

Quoting cargolex (Reply 32):
You can't pin the MD-11's poor sales entirely on the A340, because the A340 was also effected by the market forces that hurt the MD-11. But early on, it probably did have some impact.

Among other problems, the MD-11 fell far short of it's expected range goal, and that prompted some airlines to gravitate towards the A340 instead. SQ is the most obvious one because they literally cancelled their order and bought the A340 instead. I'm sure that was a blow to confidence in the MD-11 and might have turned off some prospective customers. We'll never know if Cathay considered replacing it's L-1011s with the MD-11 instead of the A330/A340. Could the SQ cancellation have been a factor? Hard to say the real impact.

SAS, a major MD customer, was a launch customer for the MD-11 but never firmed the order and ultimately bought the 767 and later the A330/A340.

Part of it was also just bad luck. Several operators who order the MD-11, Air Zaire, JAT, Minerve, Dragonair, Nigeria Airways, and BCal either ran out of money, got bought, ran into political trouble, or had serious other issues that led to cancellations.

And another part of it was just changing times. EIS for the MD-11 was in December of 1990 with Finnair. Only six and a half years later, the 777-200ER entered service with BA. That was probably the death knell for MD-11 pax sales, because here was a big twin that could do everything the MD-11 could do only cheaper and with fewer teething problems. The MD-11's early problems coupled with the rapid evolution of the market - which neither MD nor Airbus could have predicted in 1986 when both programs were in their early stages - meant that further orders that might have come down the pike if the 777 and A330 had not been there never came.

Yep. Just bad timing and bad luck it seems. Although I feel I should clarify that I asked "Did the A340 really contribute to the MD-11/DC-10's demise?" not "Did the A340 cause [insert context]." But thanks for the awesome response. Didn't know SAS launched and backed out of the MD-11.

Does nobody have the actual fuel consumption numbers? MTOW/Fuel/Range doesn't seem very accurate.
Fly Delta Jets
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12359
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:38 am

What if the MD-11, as was proposed at one point as the MD-12, to be a 2-engined a/c? I would have beaten the 777 into service by several years and may have saved them, at least in civilian aircraft, for a few more years
 
ghifty
Posts: 885
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:58 am

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 38):
What if the MD-11, as was proposed at one point as the MD-12, to be a 2-engined a/c? I would have beaten the 777 into service by several years and may have saved them, at least in civilian aircraft, for a few more years

That'd be like the Boeing engineers deciding to turn the 747 into a tri-jet. Which they did attempt, and then backed out of. I think the "twin-engined" DC-10/MD-11/L-1011 conversation has already been discussed here...
Fly Delta Jets
 
neutronstar73
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:57 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:16 am

ermm...I think you have that a bit backwards. The MD-11 didn't meet initial expectations, but has been a reasonably safe aircraft and capable in its service. It also came along in the age of the 777, which didn't help it at all.

The DC-10 had some problems in the beginning but after things were sorted out, it went on the be a reliable and relatively long-service aircraft.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:42 am

A cynical definition of a successful airline model is that it produces enough cash flow to develop the next generation. Profits be darned!
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
AAIL86
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:00 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:52 am

Quoting HDA212 (Reply 36):
I would hardly call either a 'success'
Quoting Max Q (Reply 29):
I wouldn't call either a success.

The DC-10 was a qualified success, the MD-11 was not. Trying to compare them both is simply not valid- and ignores the fact that the MD-11 should have been much better, as it was a direct derivative of the DC-10 and McDonnell Douglas should have been able to harness all the lessons of 30 years of widebody operation.

For all the talk about the safety record of the DC10, remember that flying is significantly safer in the last 10-15 years then it was the first decade of DC-10 ops, or even in the 1980s. Simply put- there were far more fatal crashes back then. And while the D10 certainly took a black eye in the 1970s, it went on to enjoy a full service life with its major operators. In fact, American took on additional secondhand DC-10s in the 1980s to add to their already large fleet. In contrast, Delta and American were both so dissatisfied with the MD-11 that they literally couldn't get rid of them fast enough. AA retired the DC-10 in late 2000- and its intended replacement in 2002. Similarly, Delta kept the L1011 almost as long as the MD-11. That should be all the proof anyone needs on which program was generally a success and which was a failure...

Of all the large MD-11 operators, only KLM seems to found any long-term satisfaction from the MD-11.

[Edited 2012-02-14 19:56:09]
Next
 
AAIL86
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:00 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:01 am

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 41):
A cynical definition of a successful airline model is that it produces enough cash flow to develop the next generation. Profits be darned!

Aviation has not made a profit in its entire history, so why why is this surprising???  
Next
 
HPRamper
Posts: 4588
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 4:22 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:56 am

I would not simply boil it down to success or failure overall. Arguably, the MD11 was disappointing as a passenger carrier but as far as I am concerned it has been a huge success as a cargo hauler. The DC-10 has had more success across the board but does not appear to have the longevity of the MD-11 - I say this because the last -10 fleets are going the way of the dodo while the -11s appear to be going quite strong.

When taking into consideration the cycles involved in cargo hauling, a couple of accidents don't make or break the deal. IIRC there has been quite a few 747 accidents over the years in cargo fleets yet it's not really considered a "dangerous" or "unsuccessful" plane.
 
FX1816
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:02 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:36 am

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 44):
The DC-10 has had more success across the board but does not appear to have the longevity of the MD-11 - I say this because the last -10 fleets are going the way of the dodo while the -11s appear to be going quite strong.

Really, the DC10 has much more longevity than the MD11 at this point. The MD11 is all but gone as a passenger plane and there was even a thread here recently about LH Cargo looking at replacing the MD11 with the 772F. It would not surprise me at all, if Boeing started a 777BCF program, that the MD11 retirement around the globe would accelerate.

Don't get me wrong I love the MD11 and the DC10 and I was even fortunate to jump seat on 1 MD11 and 3 MD10s with FDX back in December but I would hardly say that the DC10 has not had the longevity of the MD11.

FX1816
 
n729pa
Posts: 583
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:16 pm

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:25 am

IMO, the fact the major airlines started to off load the MD11 so early speaks for itself. OK there are some that have persisted with it. It's safety record isn't that good either relative to the number of airframes, ok the DC10 had it's problems and some high profile accidents but some of those were caused by other matters rather than anything inhertity wrong with design, as it is suggested with the MD11.

I think the MD11 came at the wrong time in the end, why have 3 engines when you can have 2. Personally I fear the 747-8 is also in the same mould, it's not been selling in any great numbers and only a few of the traditional 747 operators have ordered it, particularly for the passenger configation, so unfortunately I think we are seeing the end of the 747 (granted a few more years off in production terms), but it won't go on forever like the 737 can or the A320 could. Sorry strayed off the DC10/MD11 topic a little bit.
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:49 am

Quoting 777STL (Reply 16):
Which wasn't so much the fault of the MD11 as it was the IFE equipment that it was equipped with.

The IFE equipment caused the spark, but it was the insulation (which was standard equipment for the MD-11 - it's since been banned) that allowed it to spread so quickly. So yes, that crash did have something to do with the airplane.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1491
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:12 am

Quoting northstardc4m (Reply 9):
Cargo door problems leading to infamous THY crash in Ermondville, France

IIRC, the FAA was equally to blame for this accident because it did not mandate thorough correction of the cargo door problem on the white tails parked at MD at the time, among which was the ill-fated THY aircraft (I recall that the THY aircraft were originally due to be delivered to another carrier which backed out; perhaps ANA). The cargo door problem was known to MD and the FAA from June 1972 with the AA96 incident over Detroit.

This is my understanding of the accident, which was an epic design/management (MD) and regulatory (FAA) failure.

Faro
The chalice not my son
 
CiC
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:51 am

RE: The MD11 Succeeded, But Did The DC10 Fail?

Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:56 pm

Sad that no airline ordered the MD-11 option for the "panorama deck" in the front part of the fuselage, and sad that they never started the MD-11 strech... maybe the strech would become more successful, and the first competition to the queen of the skies, before the 77W entered service???

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aaway, BDABOY, Bing [Bot], CANPILOT, dubaiamman243, eidvm, georgiabill, Google Adsense [Bot], Heavierthanair, keesje, MrHMSH, neromancer, OA940, quic330, rutankrd, SANFan, SCQ83, seat1a, SXI899, TheF15Ace, TK787 and 329 guests