User avatar
jetjack74
Topic Author
Posts: 6606
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:02 pm

So is this airplane a DC9 rip-off or is Boeing somehow, some way in volved with this. It looks like a DC9-10

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Air Sheep


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © lihutao

Made from jets!
 
KBJCpilot
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 7:12 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:04 pm

I was thinking the same thing.

IMHO, this is Chinese reverse engineering/industrial espionage at its finest on display.   
Samsonite, I was way off!
 
ordpark
Posts: 568
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:20 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:14 pm

The latest in Chinese aviation technology! The Eastern block's best designs have always been knockoffs of western designed aircraft......
 
doug_or
Posts: 3138
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2000 9:55 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:14 pm

Back in the 80s MD opened up a Shanghai factory to build MD-80s... 20 years later- SURPRISE!

MD-80s Made In China (by Bruce Feb 29 2008 in Civil Aviation)
When in doubt, one B pump off
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 4505
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:17 pm

On the first picture, it looks a bit like a 717. The ARJ21 is just in between the DC-9-10 and -30. The nose and the tail look cleary "inspired" by the DC-9/MD-80 family. A number of MD-80s were assembled at Shanghai under license.
 
NobleRT
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:23 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:22 pm

There are only so many ways to make an effecient, effective t-tail without re-inventing the wheel. To me, the wing looks very different and the body looks chunkier. It's clearly a different species of the same genus.
 
goosebayguy
Posts: 555
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:12 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:33 pm

Reminds me of the early reverse engineering they did of the jet engine. The RR Nene for their Migs. Sometimes they managed to last for 100 hours.
 
doug_or
Posts: 3138
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2000 9:55 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:40 pm

Quoting ordpark (Reply 2):
The Eastern block's best designs have always been knockoffs of western designed aircraft......

  

Ridiculous assertion. The TU-154 is not the 727, the IL-96 is no A340, and the engine configuration of the TU-134 gives it no more in common with the DC-9 than the A320 has with the 737.

Quoting NobleRT (Reply 5):
There are only so many ways to make an effecient, effective t-tail without re-inventing the wheel. To me, the wing looks very different and the body looks chunkier. It's clearly a different species of the same genus.

The fuselage nose, empenage, and barrel all seem to be dirrect copies. Not sure exactly what you mean by chunkier, but the cabin has the same diameter as the DC-9 series. It might just look fat because it is so short.

You are correct that the wing is a whole cloth new design. Maybe I'm just used to longer engines on the DC-9 series, but those CF-34s look hilariously cartoony to me.
When in doubt, one B pump off
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 4:42 pm

The tooling for the MD-80s was left behind and this is made in the same buildings. Hmmmm.

It is not a total knockoff. The wing (and landing gear?) were redesigned with Russian help. These of course had problems.
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 5:14 pm

They did improve on one thing with regard to the DC-9-10 to -50, and that is putting full sized doors in the back. That jettisonable tail cone of the early DC-9s, has always been a sore spot.

In almost 75% of ground evacuations, the tail cone could not be opened.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 5:34 pm

The fuselage is a derivative of the MD-90, built using the original MD tooling. No license needed apparently, or so says the official line.

Quoting ordpark (Reply 2):

The latest in Chinese aviation technology! The Eastern block's best designs have always been knockoffs of western designed aircraft......

Or so say the uninitiated...


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 5:52 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 10):
Or so say the uninitiated...

The clueless, ill-informed, simplistic observer might say so - 'uninitiated' is very generous in reference to such nonsense.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10022
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 6:01 pm

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 11):
The clueless, ill-informed, simplistic observer might say so - 'uninitiated' is very generous in reference to such nonsense.

Ignore the flag, I'm British - I have a duty to be overly polite  


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 6:23 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 12):
Ignore the flag, I'm British - I have a duty to be overly polite

Noted Dan. However, I am British too, and that idiotic suggestion always overwhelms my English polite streak!  
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
rikkus67
Posts: 1152
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2000 11:34 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 6:30 pm

The COMAC ARJ21 has come up in the forum many times since the mid-2000's.


The ARJ21 was developed using the original jigs from the MD-80, after a number of MD80 aircraft were built in China. This retooling of the DC-9/MD-80 series aircraft, is to help China jumpstart their Commercial Aircraft industry. The aircraft will allow for eventual Autonomy, by gaining experience producing an entire aircraft, rather than as a supplier of major components for other manufacturers. With a burgeoning need for Regional Aircraft, the ARJ21 was designed to answer the need for such aircraft.

Major changes include new GE powerplants, a new wing designed by Antonov, and all new avionics. Other changes include the simplification of the cockpit windows, a redesign of the tail to eliminate the rear stairs, and the addition of full size rear fuselage exits.

Although the MD80 jigs were used, this aircraft is quite a different beast than the original DC-9-10/20/30.

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 7):
Maybe I'm just used to longer engines on the DC-9 series, but those CF-34s look hilariously cartoony to me.

Most powerful JT8D engine is the -219 version, with a thrust of 21,000lbf. This version powered the large MD-80 series.

The strongest variant of the CFM34 has a thrust rating of 20,000lbf, which is powering a significantly smaller aircraft.
AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
 
delta88
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 7:35 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 7:21 pm

The reason this intresting aircraft looks like a DC-9 is because it is made with the technology, as well as the machines, that built the MD-80s. MDC/Boeing never asked for the machinery back when production ended so they simply used what they had to produce a new aircraft.
B712,B738,B739,B752,B762ER,B763ER,B772ER,MD82,MD83,MD88,MD90,A320,CRJ9,CRJ2,EMJ145,ERJ175
 
mtnwest1979
Posts: 1815
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 4:23 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 7:44 pm

The future stretch version is what Denzel was flying....  

Guess they took the best parts and added what they thought could make it a good plane. Hope it is successful.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
 
User avatar
pvjin
Posts: 3186
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:52 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 7:58 pm

Quoting ordpark (Reply 2):
The Eastern block's best designs have always been knockoffs of western designed aircraft......



Have you ever heard of AN-24? AN-12? IL-76? No western counterparts for any of these, not from that time at least.

These widely manufactured good Soviet made cargo aircraft still carry majority of cargo in areas like Congo, in extremely bad conditions where very few western made commercial aircraft can operate effectively.

Also TU-154 has been successfully operated for decades and very much differs from 727 and other western competitors from that era.

I think quite a lot of AN-2's are still flying too.
"Optimism is the madness of insisting that all is well when we are miserable." - Voltaire
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:22 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 9):
They did improve on one thing with regard to the DC-9-10 to -50, and that is putting full sized doors in the back. That jettisonable tail cone of the early DC-9s, has always been a sore spot.

All of the DC9 series up to and including the MD90 STILL have the jettison tail cone with an evacuation slide.

I know--every year we have to demonstrate proficiency on it.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2822
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:28 pm

Quoting pvjin (Reply 17):
Have you ever heard of AN-24? AN-12? IL-76?

AN-24 - F27, F50, HPR.7 Dart Herald

AN-12 - C-130

IL-76 - C-141
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:33 pm

I have a friend who was (and still is) a tech rep for Boeing. He loves to tell this story.

Back in the 70's when the CAAC bought their first western airplanes, they bought 10 B707-320's. Each, of course, came equipped with 4 brand new Pratt and Whitney JT3 fan jets. With a fleet of 10 airplanes, Boeing recommended they buy an additional 3-4 engines as spares. The Chinese listened politely and bought FORTY spare engines! Seems they were used to Russian reliability on their engines and were taking no chances.

They immediately reverse engineered a 707--it was jokingly referred to as the 708 by Boeing staff. It never actually flew--supposedly it was so heavy it couldn't. It was a plug ugly thing. It had been "improved". But, of course, under the wings were 4 nice new Pratts. Mark used to laugh that one day we would see an AN-2 biplane with a big Pratt and Whitney engine stuck under its belly.

It was reported that most of the engines remained in their original crates until the CAAC sold the fleet off. A few are still flying in Iran.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:39 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 18):
All of the DC9 series up to and including the MD90 STILL have the jettison tail cone with an evacuation slide.

Yes, but on the DC-9-10 to -50, the tail cone is the only exit aft of the over-wing exits. When the F100s were ordered by UA and AA, without the rear fuselage door, FAA apparently was reluctant to allow it ... until it was pointed out they allowed it with the DC-9-10 to -50, and by then the reliability record of the tail cone was known.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3982
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:39 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 19):

Most of those planes don't look anything alike except for a vague configuration similarity which is more of a byproduct of their mission, than stealing plans.

The last western plane the Russian really copied was the B-29. Since then, they've pretty much gone their own way.
What the...?
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2822
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:40 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 20):
They immediately reverse engineered a 707--it was jokingly referred to as the 708 by Boeing staff. It never actually flew--supposedly it was so heavy it couldn't.

Saw it on the Continental ramp outside the hangars in LAX, when the Chinese premier flew in to visit Reagan.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Taecoxu



[Edited 2013-05-22 05:58:04 by SA7700]
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:45 pm

Quoting doug_Or (Reply 3):
Back in the 80s MD opened up a Shanghai factory to build MD-80s...

And 2 MD-90s.

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 20):
They immediately reverse engineered a 707--it was jokingly referred to as the 708 by Boeing staff. It never actually flew--supposedly it was so heavy it couldn't.

If you're referring to the Shanghai Y-10, it most definitely did fly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGQ-7TtM4Kg


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Taecoxu

 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:46 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 23):
Saw it on the Continental ramp outside the hangars in LAX, when the Chinese premier flew in to visit Reagan.

GREAT picture! I humbly stand corrected on the "never flew" part of my post. Do you recall what designation the Chinese gave to the aircraft?
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:50 pm

Did you notice on the Youtube video that the forward entry door had no emergency evacuation slide?
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:51 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 23):
Saw it on the Continental ramp outside the hangars in LAX, when the Chinese premier flew in to visit Reagan.

I don't believe it ever flew to the U.S. It only made a few test flights and was never developed to the point of carrying passengers.
 
User avatar
anfromme
Posts: 774
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:58 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 8:58 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 25):
Do you recall what designation the Chinese gave to the aircraft?

According to the photo database entry and the designation seen on its tail in the video, it's called the Y-10. Interesting find I'd never even heard of it!
42
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 9:04 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 9):
In almost 75% of ground evacuations, the tail cone could not be opened.

The one time NW had to use the tailcone exit was when the B-727 sliced through the cabin of the DC9-10 in fog on take off in DTW.

Our flight attendant seated back there tried to deploy the slide and drop the tail cone but the cable that caused it to detach had been misrigged. Unfortunately, she did not survive the accident.

After that happened the FAA made NW drop the tail cone on every single DC9 in the fleet--they all worked perfectly. But as a result of this sad accident, NW installed a second deploying handle just inside the tailcone entry. Now you could stand in the cabin, pull the handle and if it did not drop you could redirect passengers forward to an overwing exit. In her honor we always referred to it as "The Heidi Handle." There is a narrow metal catwalk that leads back to the exit but there is a large, heavy duct of some kind that you have to bend over and duck under to reach it. The deployment handle was all the way in the rear. In the aftermath they found at least one passenger that also had succumbed with a large fracture to his skull where he apparently had rammed into it in the dark.

With the advent of the MD80/90 aircraft, an automatic slide deployment feature was incorporated in the design and now the handle in the tailcone is just a backup.

Flight attendants HATE going through that drill every year and (for me at least) it was the one that I easily made mistakes.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3269
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 9:11 pm

Following this logic of knock-offs, the original model in this series must surely be the BAC1-11.
come visit the south pacific
 
catiii
Posts: 2407
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 9:12 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 9):
They did improve on one thing with regard to the DC-9-10 to -50, and that is putting full sized doors in the back. That jettisonable tail cone of the early DC-9s, has always been a sore spot.

In almost 75% of ground evacuations, the tail cone could not be opened.

There's a better video somewhere, but here's a good tailcone fail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D391ei3-s28
 
turn720
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 10:40 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 9:26 pm

Just because it looks the same and almost has the same performance and it took flight after the original did does not necessarily mean that it's is a copy. That's just silly.

If Boeing installs a fbw side stick on it's next airliners it's definitely not a copy of Airbus.
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 9:29 pm

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 30):
Following this logic of knock-offs, the original model in this series must surely be the BAC1-11.

The BAC-111 and DC9-10 were developed almost simultaneously.

The French Caravelle was the forerunner with the two engines on the rear fuselage design. United was the only US airline to operate it. It made its first flight in 1955 and entered service with SAS in 1959. THE BAC and DC9 did not enter service until 1965.

[Edited 2013-05-21 14:35:03]
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3269
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 9:53 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 33):
The French Caravelle was the forerunner with the two engines on the rear fuselage design. United was the only US airline to operate it. It made its first flight in 1955 and entered service with SAS in 1959. THE BAC and DC9 did not enter service until 1965.

Thank you, I'm well aware of that, however as you'll notice on observation of the Caravelle, it is distinctly different from this new Chinese variant, the DC-9 and the BAC 1-11.

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 33):
The BAC-111 and DC9-10 were developed almost simultaneously.

Whilst development time may have overlapped, the British jet was first to market and set the design blueprint for consecutive airliners including the DC-9 and F-28. The Brits were also first to market with a three-holer T-jet with Trident, later superseded by Boeing's 727.

The point I was attempting to make though initially is that there are many models in most layouts and these layouts are repeated for a reason. The most succesful of which is of course the 737-100.

Peace.
come visit the south pacific
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2361
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 9:57 pm

Quoting turn720 (Reply 32):
If Boeing installs a fbw side stick on it's next airliners it's definitely not a copy of Airbus.

Boeing pooh-poohed Airbus when they flew aircraft sections to Toulouse for final assembly. Now they are doing the exact same thing.

Boeing sniffed when Airbus had a constantly moving assembly line instead of the weekly "shuffle" they did. Now Boeing does the same thing.

There will come a time when Boeing uses the sidestick controllers.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
HBGDS
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 2:09 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 10:21 pm

When AWST asked the Chinese about it, the response from one of the engineers was simply that it was a proven formula that worked, and they simply improved upon it. They make no bones about it. Reverse engineering can be done, but it is costly, inefficient, and often misses major features. That said, yes, the Chinese aircraft industry has reverse engineered some fighters as well as the 707. In the latter case, the Y10 is the result, and not a very good one at that:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/0521801/L/

See also an earlier thread on reverse engineering:
Was Y-10 Really A B-707 Copy? (by KC135TopBoom Dec 12 2007 in Civil Aviation)
 
dc1030cf
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 4:27 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 10:35 pm

The ARJ-21 actually had it's basic airframe designed by ex-Douglas engineers mated to wings designed by the Russians. The Chinese took those design and tried to expend on them, but found out they didn't know how. COMAC had to hire some retired Douglas engineers for help. So this airplane is NOT a reverse-engineered copy of the DC-9
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3982
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 10:38 pm

So what's the certification status of the ARJ-21?
What the...?
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 10:40 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 38):
So what's the certification status of the ARJ-21?

Not yet certified as far as I know.
 
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1032
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Tue May 21, 2013 11:49 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 33):
The French Caravelle was the forerunner with the two engines on the rear fuselage design. United was the only US airline to operate it. It made its first flight in 1955 and entered service with SAS in 1959. THE BAC and DC9 did not enter service until 1965.

Douglas actually offered to market the French Caravelle in the United States. It never happened   
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
PEK777
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:56 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 12:02 am

These should be available on the second hand market just about the time Delta is ready to retire the MD-90/717 fleet.

  
 
dc1030cf
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 4:27 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 12:06 am

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 40):


"Douglas actually offered to market the French Caravelle in the United States. It never happene"

I believe that was to be powered by the CJ805-23C aft-fan engines, but as you mentioned, DAC and Sud never came to agreement and after the DC-9 the French actually accused Douglas of copying their rear engine design.
 
UA735WL
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:08 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 12:10 am

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 40):

Douglas' original plan was to actually BUILD Caravelles under license from Sud and sell them to US customers. The plan fell through, but the Douglas engineers liked the twin rear engine configuration, which they retained for the DC-9 family (the Caravelle was the first aircraft to use the configuration. )


Source: Bill Gunston's Aviation Year by Year (must own book for a.nutters- lots of info and great pics!  )


Cheers,  


Jonas
"One test is worth a thousand expert opinions" -Tex Johnston
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 12:13 am

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 29):
After that happened the FAA made NW drop the tail cone on every single DC9 in the fleet--they all worked perfectly.

Yes, I understand that in the hangar, with a perfectly well functioning aircraft ... the tail cone always worked. Put that tail cone in an accident, and it's a different story. Even simple shifting of the rigging, or twisting of the fuselage or tail and that tail cone is jammed ... at witnessed in actual ground evacuations, during actual accidents.

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 29):
Flight attendants HATE going through that drill every year and (for me at least) it was the one that I easily made mistakes.

At least NW's had full doors back there, leading to stairs, when used. At AC, as there were no stairs, there was just the catwalk back to the cone. The biggest difference though was the actual door.

When you opened the door in the back (behind the F/A jump-seat), instead of a full door, the exit was revealed. It was an oval, through which you had to climb to reach the catwalk. I can't imagine even when working, that the rate of exit would be all that quick! I don't recall how big that oval was, but it reminded me of Viscount or Vanguard windows, which were minimum exit size.

NW had many many DC-9s. Do you remember any which had this tail cone arrangement? AC had one DC-9 which was leased which had stairs, that had the full door in the back ... and a special safety card!
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
nwa757boy
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 6:10 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 12:24 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 44):
NW had many many DC-9s. Do you remember any which had this tail cone arrangement? AC had one DC-9 which was leased which had stairs, that had the full door in the back ... and a special safety card!

I think almost all of the ex-EA -30 birds had this type of exit and a few of the Hughes Airwest -30s had this exit as well. It was the most comfortable jumpseat! It was like a little loveseat back there
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 12:40 am

Probably this one, C-FBKT, FIN 754, a DC-9-31 leased from Eastern for a little over a year, June 1988 to August 1989. It had non-standard bare metal livery.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank Schaefer
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thomas Kim



It later spent many years with Northwest.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darcy Stevens
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Chambers

 
md80fanatic
Posts: 2365
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:29 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 1:15 am

It may have a new wing ... but it clearly is using the same airfoil shapes (DSMA-4xx).

I think it's great that at least someone knows about this superior design and is willing to keep producing it. BRAVO!
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 146
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 1:17 am

Quoting catiii (Reply 31):
There's a better video somewhere, but here's a good tailcone fail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D391ei3-s28


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAndXzhgurI

Here is a decent video that documents the MD-80 exits.....in this video, the tail slide looks extremely steep....was it always this way?

Also....notice how the F/A struggles to manhandle the overwing hatch....
My other car is an A320-200
 
lewis
Posts: 3581
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: DC9 Rip-off Or What?

Wed May 22, 2013 1:31 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 24):

If you're referring to the Shanghai Y-10, it most definitely did fly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGQ-7TtM4Kg

Is it just me or does the logo at 0:20 look extremely similar to the Boeing logo? They couldn't even be original for that?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos