747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3890
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:21 am

Until around 2006, I always thought 747 classic was the second most advance first generation wide body built. I have reed that both the L1011 and DC10 was more advance, but I wanted to be sure that the DC10 was more advance than the 747. I been told most of my life that the 747 was much more advance than a DC10, since some may say that the 747classic was the best built airliner in the 70's. So I would like to know what was the more advance jet, the 747 classics or DC10s?


PS: I am a 747 fan, but I know the L1011 Tristar was the most advance First generation wide body, and I believe it was the best built, but I still like a 747 better.
 
ex52tech
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:28 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Tue Nov 25, 2008 2:47 am

The ARMAR program on the 741s pretty much did the airplane in for me. To have to accomplish such an extensive repair to that airframe was it's death nell, but that is what happens when you build a fuselage that is not round.

As far as advanced, do you mean avionics, design, systems, or performance?

The airline I worked for did three 741 ARMARs, and scrapped the rest. The only big ARMAR type item on a DC-10 was the engine pylons, and we had them off and accomplished the updates regularly.
The short time I worked on the L1011, I was impressed with it's system layout, and operation, had it been equipped with CF6s it would have been more marketable.

From a maintenance standpoint,......personally........, I was not impressed with the 747. The JT9s were a NIGHTMARE to work on, the placement of the hydraulic reservoirs, and adp's in the pylons as high off of the ground as they were, left one asking the question " why all the way up there" ? The trailing edge flap drive system had more moving parts than a helicopter transmission. Those are some things off the top of my head.

The DC-10, and L1011.....more advanced...... hard to say.
"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
 
ovrpowrd727
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:33 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:38 am

wasn't the DC-10 and L-1011 debut after the 747?? they might have had slightly more advanced avionics, i know the tristar had some innovative systems...the one thing the 747 had over the others was it's lounge, that plane was so large for its market in the early 70's the last area of the aircraft was commonly used as a lounge area, the DC-10s and L-1011s never actually did that, on the other hand the L-1011 had an elevator between decks...they both have their uniques
 
User avatar
N707PA
Posts: 221
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2000 11:01 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 8:43 am



Quoting Ovrpowrd727 (Reply 2):
on the other hand the L-1011 had an elevator between decks...

L-1011's, DC-10's and some 747 classics (AA,UA,QF) had the lower deck galley lifts.
 
Bellerophon
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 10:12 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 12:33 pm

747400sp

...I would like to know what was the more advance jet, the 747 classics or DC10s?...

I flew both types, and have fond memories of them both. I got my first command on the DC10 and was an instructor on the B747-100/200 for many years.

"Advanced" is a rather subjective term, that people can differ over, but what I would say is that the B747, from a pilot's point of view, is clearly a better designed aircraft in two crucial areas.

Firstly, by any standard, the design of the whole hydraulic system in the B747 is superb, with massive redundancy built in. You have to lose two out of the four systems before you effectively notice any meaningful loss, and the aircraft is quite controllable on only one system. The B747 has the best hydraulic system of any aircraft I have flown, bar none.

Secondly, the (separate-but-joined-but-can-be-separated-if-necessary-push-me-pull-you-to-move-me) flap and slat levers, and the whole procedure for selecting the required (multi-variable) flap angle setting and then setting that flap angle on the DC10 is unnecessarily complicated, poorly designed and an ergonomic nightmare.

The Boeing philosophy of having just one lever, controlling both flaps and slats, moving through fixed detents, with only seven flap selections possible (UP,1°,5°,10°,20°,25°,30°) and with reminder baulks on the most critical selections, is clearly superior.

I would quite happily fly either tomorrow, and they both had one excellent safety feature, sadly designed out of modern airliners, that I miss greatly on my present type!  Wink

Best Regards

Bellerophon
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 1:10 pm



Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 4):
they both had one excellent safety feature

You're referring to the one mounted sideways on the flight deck, I presume?  Smile

2H4
Intentionally Left Blank
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:05 pm



Quoting Ovrpowrd727 (Reply 2):
the one thing the 747 had over the others was it's lounge, that plane was so large for its market in the early 70's the last area of the aircraft was commonly used as a lounge area, the DC-10s and L-1011s never actually did that, on the other hand the L-1011 had an elevator between decks...they both have their uniques

I don't think cabin furnishings make the aircraft more advanced. By the way, both DC-10's and L-1011's had lounges in some configurations.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:36 pm



Quoting Ex52tech (Reply 1):
The ARMAR program on the 741s pretty much did the airplane in for me. To have to accomplish such an extensive repair to that airframe was it's death nell, but that is what happens when you build a fuselage that is not round.

What program was that? This is the first I've heard of it.

Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 4):
I would quite happily fly either tomorrow, and they both had one excellent safety feature, sadly designed out of modern airliners, that I miss greatly on my present type!

What type do you presently fly?
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 8:06 pm



Quoting Ovrpowrd727 (Reply 2):
the last area of the aircraft was commonly used as a lounge area, the DC-10s and L-1011s never actually did that,

CO DC-10-10s had a lounge behind the first class cabin.

Five L1011s built for PSA had a lounge in what otherwise would have been the forward cargo compartment on the lower deck. PSA only took delivery of two of those aircraft and operated them for less than a year in 1974-75. They were much too big and unsuitable shorthaul routes in California. The other 3 weren't taken up and were delivered to German charter/leisure carrier LTU.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Robinson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Burger Collection



When PSA took their 2 L1011s out of service the lounge made those aircraft unattractive to other potential operatorsand they spent quite a while stored in the desert. They were eventually leased by Aeroperu for a while and had a couple of other subsequent operators.
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:18 pm



Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 4):
Firstly, by any standard, the design of the whole hydraulic system in the B747 is superb, with massive redundancy built in. You have to lose two out of the four systems before you effectively notice any meaningful loss, and the aircraft is quite controllable on only one system. The B747 has the best hydraulic system of any aircraft I have flown, bar none.

I agree that the B-747 hydraulic system is very good (I only have experience in the 744, however); I especially appreciate the redundancy and simplicity of the system. I do have to presume, though, that you have not flown the L-1011...
 
ovrpowrd727
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:33 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:23 am

apparently i should do more research, however i did learn from you guys so all is not lost
 
Bellerophon
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 10:12 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:36 am

2H4

...You're referring to the one mounted sideways on the flight deck, I presume?...

  


SEPilot


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Snorre - VAP




Best Regards

Bellerophon

[Edited 2008-11-26 17:52:43]
 
acNDTTech
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:15 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:53 am

One thing to remember about the L-1011 and economics. Lockheed was used to building planes for the government - money was no object. They really had a hard time building airplanes for use primarily in the civillian market economically. Even the JetStar started out as an executive transport for the USAF. Lockheed made airplanes with all the bells and whistles first, and thought about the cost to build with all the bells and whistles last.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 3:59 pm



Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 11):

SEPilot





Best Regards

Bellerophon

 bigthumbsup   bigthumbsup 
Beautiful bird; my all time favorite!
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Bellerophon
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 10:12 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 5:55 pm

PGNCS

...I do have to presume, though, that you have not flown the L-1011...

Yes, you presume correctly. I bid for it, as an F/O, but sadly never got on it.

I'm not very knowledgeable about it, but am aware that the L-1011 hydraulic design, with four separate hydraulic systems (routed through different parts of the airframe) four engine driven pumps, plus several other pumps (of various sorts) and a RAT, was rightly very highly regarded.

Almost as though Lockheed thought they were designing an aircraft that would go into combat!  Wink

Lockheed undoubtedly had talented designers, and, knowing what we know now about their (covert) supersonic experience, we always wondered what would have happened if they, and not Boeing, had been given the civil transport supersonic project by the US government!

Best Regards

Bellerophon
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 7:15 pm



Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 14):
Almost as though Lockheed thought they were designing an aircraft that would go into combat!

No. Lockheed designed the L-1011 to be safe.

Both the L-1011 and the DC-10 experienced separation of the No. 2 fan disk. On the L-1011 three hydraulic systems were damaged but the crew still had control because of the fourth system. When the DC-10 lost the fan disk, it also disabled three hydraulic system, but that left the DC-10 without the use of any flight control system.
 
dc863
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 10:52 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 9:28 pm

The L1011's in '72 were more advanced than anything flying. From what I've read mechanically they were a bit of a pain.
The DC-10-10s, and -30s from 1971-73 were leaps ahead of the DC-8s and cut crew workload in half. Pilots praised the aircraft as much as crews did the L10s. It would've been interesting to hear from a former Delta pilot who had served aboard the DC-10s then transfered to the L10s by 1974/75. I'd like to hear his opinion as to which plane was "better".
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 10:26 pm



Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 14):

Lockheed undoubtedly had talented designers, and, knowing what we know now about their (covert) supersonic experience, we always wondered what would have happened if they, and not Boeing, had been given the civil transport supersonic project by the US government!

Unfortunately, the SST was done in by fuel costs more than anything else, and Lockheed had no magic bullet up their sleeve to make it more economical. It's possible that Lockheed would have designed a better plane, and might have had it flying before 1973, but when the oil price hikes of the early 70's hit it would have suffered the same fate as the 2707. It was dependent on political support to continue, and that support disappeared after 1972. Lockheed would not have been able to continue without government support any more than Boeing was able to. And certainly the airlines were in poor shape at that time, and would not have bought them. The Concorde survived because it was completed before the oil price shocks, but if it had been a few years later it would undoubtedly been canceled as well.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Venus6971
Posts: 1415
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:55 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Nov 27, 2008 10:35 pm

From all my experiance as a AMT I prefer Boeings, they were thought out as a no nonsence sense of purpose the LH,MD and Douglas's seam to have a alot of over engineering in them, a light switch can't just be a light switch mentality.
I would help you but it is not in the contract
 
ex52tech
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:28 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 1:59 am



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 7):
What program was that? This is the first I've heard of it.


ARMAR, from memory now, was the replacement of the cockpit and upper deck skin, and much of the supporting structure for the cockpit, from the forward pressure bulkhead to the end of the upper deck.

The lap seam joints were disassembled and corrosion was addressed. It was a very extensive, and expensive program that started in late 89. NW ARMARed three 741's, at about the time fuel went back up (Gulf War 1) and ended the program. As far as I know NW was the only airline to do an ARMAR, remember NW owned all of their airplanes outright back then, so there was no leasing company involved.

6601US flew for many more years because of the program. The program cost more than the airplanes were worth..........so as Clint Eastwood would say "scrap the whale Clyde".
"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
 
411A
Posts: 1788
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:34 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 7:23 am



Quoting Dc863 (Reply 16):
It would've been interesting to hear from a former Delta pilot who had served aboard the DC-10s then transfered to the L10s by 1974/75. I'd like to hear his opinion as to which plane was "better".

I know one, personally.
Now retired from active flying, he told me that the L1011 was, hands down, his favorite.
A true gentlemans airplane, he says.

After fifteen thousand hours in Command of the L1011and, still flying one, today), I would certainly have to agree.
Especially autopilot/avionics systems design.
Positively, nothing finer....then. Only the 777 comes close...now, according to pilots whom have flown both types extensively.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:16 pm



Quoting Ex52tech (Reply 19):
ARMAR, from memory now, was the replacement of the cockpit and upper deck skin, and much of the supporting structure for the cockpit, from the forward pressure bulkhead to the end of the upper deck.

Thanks for the info. I take it this was in response to an AD; do you know the number? Did this arise just in response to corrosion discovered on some aircraft, or did an event precipitate it?
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 4:22 pm



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 21):
Thanks for the info. I take it this was in response to an AD; do you know the number? Did this arise just in response to corrosion discovered on some aircraft, or did an event precipitate it?



Quoting Ex52tech (Reply 19):
ARMAR, from memory now, was the replacement of the cockpit and upper deck skin, and much of the supporting structure for the cockpit, from the forward pressure bulkhead to the end of the upper deck.

I am no 747 expert but it sounds to me like you are describing the Section 41 Mod. The flat side of the 747 that extends to the upper deck has to be replaced/modified after a specific number of cycles because of fatigue.

The following has some details of the problem:

http://www.plane-truth.com/fatigue_details.htm
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 4:43 pm



Quoting Dc863 (Reply 16):
It would've been interesting to hear from a former Delta pilot who had served aboard the DC-10s then transfered to the L10s by 1974/75. I'd like to hear his opinion as to which plane was "better".

I would think all you need to know is that Delta bought forty four (44) new L-1011's from Lockheed and twenty three (23) used L-1011's from various operators. Delta operated the L-1011 for over 28 years. They operated five (5) DC-10's for three (3) years.
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 4:46 pm



Quoting 474218 (Reply 22):
I am no 747 expert but it sounds to me like you are describing the Section 41 Mod. The flat side of the 747 that extends to the upper deck has to be replaced/modified after a specific number of cycles because of fatigue

I am not sure what specific AD covered the ARMAR or if there was an actual AD, but the section 41 mod is not the same.

NW initially did a 727-100 and a 747-100 and put a lot of manpower into the process. IIRC, they beat Boeing's estimate for manhours by almost 40%. I flew the both aircraft with the FAA and a boatload of mechanics once the ARMAR was completed. Both aircraft were an absolute joy to fly.

The Section 41 mod but a band on the window post of window 3 L/R to stop the cracks extending along the fuselage.

But, back to the question. The DC-10 was a much quieter cockpit and more ergonomically designed. The 747 was classic Boeing, it worked good and lasted a long time. Both were a pleasrue to fly and I would gladly fly either.
Fly fast, live slow
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 4:57 pm



Quoting 474218 (Reply 22):
The following has some details of the problem:

http://www.plane-truth.com/fatigue_d...s.htm

Thanks for the post; it was quite informative.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
dc863
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 10:52 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:59 pm



Quoting 474218 (Reply 23):
would think all you need to know is that Delta bought forty four (44) new L-1011's from Lockheed and twenty three (23) used L-1011's from various operators. Delta operated the L-1011 for over 28 years. They operated five (5) DC-10's for three (3) years.

Delta had the DC-10s leased from UA only as stop gaps until the L1011s arrived. The L10 was the mainstay of the widebody fleet for DA. However they had flight crews fly both I'm certain, I'm curious for those who did who favored the 10 or the L10.
 
point8six
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:44 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Sat Nov 29, 2008 7:20 pm

From a pilot's perspective, the L1011 was streets ahead of the early 747's and the DC10, however, the 747-400 and the MD11 caught up with Lockheed's excellence. The 747-200 greatly improved Boeing's range, whereas the L1011-100 and 200 series (with original RR engines), never quite made the performance quoted, (much like the MD11), and the DC10-30 had the edge on performance. Although I didn't have the pleasure of flyimg a DC10, it's cockpit looked quite basic compared to the L1011. All this is of course, my humble opinion! Should I reach for my Kevlars now?
 
acNDTTech
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:15 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Sat Nov 29, 2008 7:28 pm



Quoting 411A (Reply 20):
After fifteen thousand hours in Command of the L1011and, still flying one, today),

YOU LUCKY DOG!!!!!!!!  drool 
 
acNDTTech
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:15 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Sat Nov 29, 2008 7:36 pm

Were the original Delta DC-10 pilots also former CV-880 pilots? I remember that most of the original L-10 pilots transitioned to them after the 880. Naturally, I know that some came from other a/c, but what did most of them fly prior to the DC-10......and 747 as well,while we're on the subject? It would have been a pretty cool note on one's pilot's license - ATP for all 3.
 
dc863
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 10:52 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Sat Nov 29, 2008 9:26 pm



Quoting AcNDTTech (Reply 29):
Were the original Delta DC-10 pilots also former CV-880 pilots?

Good question. I've read that DC-8 Captains were offered 747 slots in 1970. Perhaps some 880 Capt were offered the same when the DC-10s were introduced. They probably went to the 727 after the -10s were returned.
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:02 am



Quoting Point8six (Reply 27):
...whereas the L1011-100 and 200 series (with original RR engines)...

The L-1011-100 was powered by the RB211-22B engines (same as the L-1011-1's). The L-1011-200 used the higher rated RB211-524's.
 
point8six
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:44 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:28 pm

474218 - I think the engine rating was airline specific. As far as I can remember (and my wife says my memory is selective, i.e. I only remember to record sports programmes and not her selections!), my airline had L1011 -1s and-50s with RB211-B2s and the -200s with RB211-C1s -I can't remember the engine ratings for the-500s. I believe that Delta upgraded their L1011s with better rated engines, something that my airline decided was too costly. The B747-200 was fitted with the RB211-524D4s.
The L1011 was sophisticated compared to the B747 Classic and the DC10, but for engineering was complex and that may be partly why it undersold compared to the others.
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:09 am



Quoting Point8six (Reply 32):
474218 - I think the engine rating was airline specific. As far as I can remember (and my wife says my memory is selective, i.e. I only remember to record sports programmes and not her selections!), my airline had L1011 -1s and-50s with RB211-B2s and the -200s with RB211-C1s -I can't remember the engine ratings for the-500s. I believe that Delta upgraded their L1011s with better rated engines, something that my airline decided was too costly. The B747-200 was fitted with the RB211-524D4s.

RB211's were not airline specific. However, for cominality some operators only operated one specific sub type.

If your airline operated L-1011-1 and -50 (Lockheed Model L-1011-385-1) they were all powered by RB211-22B engines. These engines were rated at 42,000 pound of thrust. The -50's had structural modifications that incerased their MTOW from 430K to 450K.

The RB211-22B also powered the L-1011-100, the -100 had one fuel bay in the center wing box and had a MTOW of 466K or 474K, Lockheeed Model L-1011-385-1-14 or L-1011-385-1-15.

The L-1011-200 also had one fuel bay in the center wing box, however, it was powered by the RB211-524 engine. The -524 had 49,000 pound of thrust. Their Lockheed model number was also L1011-385-1-14 or L-1011-385-1-15.

The RB211-524 also powered the L-1011-500 (Lockheed Model L-1011-385-3)

There were five (5) specific sub types of the RB211 engine approved for use on the L-1011:

RB211-22B-02
RB211-524B-02
RB211-524B4-02
RB211-524B3-02
RB211-524B4-D-02

Addtionally there was a RB211-22C engine with 39,000 pounds of thrust, approved for the L-1011 but done exist today.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5695
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:10 am

Which engine was on Delta's 250's ?
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:41 am



Quoting Max Q (Reply 34):
Which engine was on Delta's 250's ?

The six (6) Delta -250's were fitted with RB211-524B4's. The -250 had a GTOW of 510K and had three (3) wet bays in the center wing box.
 
AAH732UAL
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 9:41 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:35 am



Quoting PGNCS (Reply 9):

I think your the one who said the L1011 was the fist to have VNAV, albeit very crude.

So I would say there is no answer to the question and I will explain why........

The 747-100/200 along with the 707 pioneered a lot of the navigation systems (IE the first Delco Carouse INS).

Then the DC-10 and L1011 go the finished product and was able to advance systems even more. So IMHO, it was a constant trade off in the INS navigation field.
DME/DME RNP0.3 NA -Escalators don't break---- they just become stairs!
 
stratosphere
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:45 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:47 am

The DC-10 and the L-1011 were great a/c. But the DC-10 was hastily put together to compete with the L1011. The L1011 was better engineered. The DC-10 had some bugs to work out unfortunately the bugs were in the form of crashes. The 79 crash at ORD comes to mind. If that scenario had happened on an L1011 that crash would not have happened as the L10's slats would have locked in the extended position with the loss of hydraulics and not retracted as the AA DC-10 did. But after the bugs were worked out the DC-10 turned out to be the trijet that survived over the L10. Both were great to ride in from a pax perspective atleast for me.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:20 pm



Quoting Stratosphere (Reply 37):
The 79 crash at ORD comes to mind. If that scenario had happened on an L1011 that crash would not have happened as the L10's slats would have locked in the extended position with the loss of hydraulics and not retracted as the AA DC-10 did.

What's more, I believe that the L-1011 had the hydraulic lines routed so that the departing engine wouldn't have severed them in the first place. I believe that all Boeing planes do, as well.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Max Q
Posts: 5695
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:37 pm

Not just that, lockheed installed hydraulic 'fuses' (that MD copied after the DC10 crash in Sioux City) that would shut off the flow of hydraulic fluid if a rapid loss was sensed preserving that system.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Wed Dec 03, 2008 11:47 pm



Quoting Max Q (Reply 39):
Not just that, lockheed installed hydraulic 'fuses' (that MD copied after the DC10 crash in Sioux City) that would shut off the flow of hydraulic fluid if a rapid loss was sensed preserving that system.

Haven't flown the 10 in a number of years, but IIRC they had them prior to the UAL crash.
Fly fast, live slow
 
ex52tech
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:28 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:13 am



Quoting 474218 (Reply 22):
I am no 747 expert but it sounds to me like you are describing the Section 41 Mod. The flat side of the 747 that extends to the upper deck has to be replaced/modified after a specific number of cycles because of fatigue.

I am not sure if the ARMAR program was THE section 41 mod. I have been trying to contact a friend that extensively worked that program, but what was described in that posting was in my recollection the ARMAR program in a nut shell.

Quoting Stratosphere (Reply 37):
The DC-10 and the L-1011 were great a/c. But the DC-10 was hastily put together to compete with the L1011. The L1011 was better engineered. The DC-10 had some bugs to work out unfortunately the bugs were in the form of crashes. The 79 crash at ORD comes to mind.

I totally agree with you. I have always felt that way about the DC-10. The DC-10 was rushed, and you could tell exactly what systems or sections of the aircraft that were effected by that rush. The "Turkish Air" crash in 74 comes to mind, the cargo doors were poorly designed, along with just about everything else inside the cargo compartments.


Quoting Max Q (Reply 39):
Not just that, lockheed installed hydraulic 'fuses' (that MD copied after the DC10 crash in Sioux City) that would shut off the flow of hydraulic fluid if a rapid loss was sensed preserving that system.

The "fuses" if you want to call it that, was actually a sensor in the #3 hyd. reservoir that would shut off hydraulic power to the tail once the reservoir dropped down to 4 gallons remaining. It wasn't a fuse in the same sense as the brake fuses in the landing gear on most airliners.
"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
 
PhilSquares
Posts: 3371
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2004 6:06 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Dec 04, 2008 9:30 am



Quoting Ex52tech (Reply 41):
I am not sure if the ARMAR program was THE section 41 mod. I have been trying to contact a friend that extensively worked that program, but what was described in that posting was in my recollection the ARMAR program in a nut shell.

No, the Section 41 mod is not the ARMAR program. The 41 mod was accomplished long before the ARMAR program was thought up. The piece added to the aft window frame at 3 L/R was done probably about 10+ years prior to the ARMAR program. What did happen is the brace was removed from that location after the ARMAR was complete since the underlying structure had been changed to reflect the redesign of the area to minimize the propagation of cracks along the longitudinal axis towards doors 1 L/R.

In fact, the largest single expenditure of manpower ($$) on the ARMAR program was the renovation of the fuselage forward of doors 1 L/R. The removal and reinstall of the cockpit was by far the largest single item in the ARMAR process.
Fly fast, live slow
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:25 pm



Quoting Ex52tech (Reply 41):
The "fuses" if you want to call it that, was actually a sensor in the #3 hyd. reservoir that would shut off hydraulic power to the tail once the reservoir dropped down to 4 gallons remaining. It wasn't a fuse in the same sense as the brake fuses in the landing gear on most airliners.

The L-1011 rudder fuse is an actual fuse and works in conjunction with the rudder fuse differential pressure sensor. If the sensor senses differential pressure it closes the fuse.

The sensor and fuse are located in the aft body above the horizontal stabilizer.
 
ex52tech
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:28 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:54 pm



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 42):
The removal and reinstall of the cockpit was by far the largest single item in the ARMAR process.

Yes I remember standing on the floorboard support structure in the main cabin and looking up, other than some cables and wire bundles tied up, there was a whole lot of nothing where the cockpit used to be, all the way to the crown.

Quoting 474218 (Reply 43):
The L-1011 rudder fuse is an actual fuse and works in conjunction with the rudder fuse differential pressure sensor. If the sensor senses differential pressure it closes the fuse.

The sensor and fuse are located in the aft body above the horizontal stabilizer.

There were several safety items like those fuses that Douglass should have incorporated into the design. Just another instance where it looks like the design was rushed into production. The hyd. fuses in the tail, just like the slat lock outs were really only needed once, but they would have really helped in both cases.
"Saddest thing I ever witnessed....an airplane being scrapped"
 
nycbjr
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:35 am

This is a great thread and very very informative! I never had the pleasure of riding on any of the classic wide bodies, sadly.. but this thread has allowed me to dream  Smile (although possible I may have and don't re-call, my earliest memory was on a Piedmont 727).

It's interesting to hear that MD "rushed" the DC-10 into service.. I always thought it was just engineering over site.. but hearing about how over built the L-1011 was, makes me even sadder I never got to travel on the "tritanic".

cheers  wave 
 
acNDTTech
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:15 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:47 am



Quoting Nycbjr (Reply 45):
"tritanic".

Tritanic.....I never heard that one before. I like that.

My favorite saying about the L-10 was that it was like a '76 Cadillac - the nicest ride in the sky, but something always needed to be fixed. I DO miss those days. I remember Delta's system schedules always had the L-10's in bold print. I would plan my travel around the bold print. I didn't care if I had to change planes multiple times, or have multiple stops enroute......as long as it was an L-1011, I was happy.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:00 pm



Quoting Nycbjr (Reply 45):

It's interesting to hear that MD "rushed" the DC-10 into service.. I always thought it was just engineering over site..

There was more to it than just being "rushed" into service. McDonnell had just taken over Douglas when the DC-10 design got under way, and McDonnell had never built anything except military planes. When you build for the military you design to specification, period. When you design civilian planes you build the safest plane you know how to, regardless of what the FAA "requirements" may be. Boeing, Douglas, and Lockheed had all learned this; McDonnell had not, and it was McDonnell people who were calling the shots. Therefore there were things done on the DC-10 (primarily hydraulic line routings) that the FAA allowed that were easier and cheaper, but Boeing, Lockheed, and Douglas (before they were taken over) never would have done that led to subsequent crashes. The three big DC-10 crashes (Turkish Airlines, AA-191, UA-232) would not have happened, IMHO, had the design not been controlled by McDonnell. All of the others take great care not to run the lines for all hydraulic systems together, and lines in the wing are run where they are protected and not along the leading edge (as the slat control lines are on the DC-10.)
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Dec 05, 2008 2:52 pm



Quoting Bellerophon (Reply 4):
Secondly, the (separate-but-joined-but-can-be-separated-if-necessary-push-me-pull-you-to-move-me) flap and slat levers, and the whole procedure for selecting the required (multi-variable) flap angle setting and then setting that flap angle on the DC10 is unnecessarily complicated, poorly designed and an ergonomic nightmare.

The Boeing philosophy of having just one lever, controlling both flaps and slats, moving through fixed detents, with only seven flap selections possible (UP,1°,5°,10°,20°,25°,30°) and with reminder baulks on the most critical selections, is clearly superior.

AFAIK, the early 747-100s also had a seperate lever for the slats (AFIAK one factor which contributed to the LH 747 crash in Nairobi, the first one ever involving a 747). After this accident the design was changed to a one lever system for both flaps and slats.

Concerning the "confusing" flap system, do you mean the dial-a-flap system?

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5022
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Which Was More Advance 747 Classic Or DC10s?

Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:07 pm



Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 48):
AFAIK, the early 747-100s also had a separate lever for the slats (AFIAK one factor which contributed to the LH 747 crash in Nairobi, the first one ever involving a 747). After this accident the design was changed to a one lever system for both flaps and slats.

I just looked up this crash, and what I could find offers a different scenario. The problem was that the hydraulic system controlling the slats was not turned on; the slats were selected down. What was changed after this crash was that a warning system was added if the hydraulics were not properly configured. No change in the flap/slat controls was mentioned.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: snowmann and 14 guests

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