777way
Topic Author
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:38 am

Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:46 pm

Just wondering, if its been discussed before then delete the topic.

[Edited 2015-09-03 14:16:00]
 
UA444
Posts: 2783
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:54 pm

Undoubtedly there would be far more MD-11s built if there wasn't the 777.
 
diverted
Posts: 1236
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 3:17 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:56 pm

Same goes for the 343/345/346
 
Sooner787
Posts: 2567
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:56 pm

I think there would've been a lot more A330's & A340's built   
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26404
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:00 pm

Quoting UA444 (Reply 1):
Undoubtedly there would be far more MD-11s built if there wasn't the 777.

Agreed. Once the MD-11 met it's performance targets, it likely would have sold better, especially to existing large DC-10 customers who were using it on long-haul flights.

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 3):
I think there would've been a lot more A330's & A340's built.   

The A340-300 certainly would have sold better, though I think the pressure on Airbus to improve the A330-300's operating weights to make it more capable would have been much less (as they would have pushed customers to the A340-300).
 
38m
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:46 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:02 pm

Huge success of A340/330, a lot more of MD-11, IL-96, 747,767... and even A380!
 
LH707330
Posts: 2213
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:06 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 3):
I think there would've been a lot more A330's & A340's built

This would likely have been the case IMHO as well. SQ notably swapped from the MD-11 to the 340 when the former had issues. The other thing to remember is that there was a recession in the early 90s that hit the 340/MD-11 more so than the 777 that hit the shelves later.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:09 pm

Quoting 777way (Thread starter):
Just wondering, if its beens discussed before then delete the topic.

Very likely, while I agree with diverted and Sooner787

Quoting diverted (Reply 2):

Same goes for the 343/345/346
Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 3):
I think there would've been a lot more A330's & A340's built

I don't see why the MD-11 couldn't have got to 400-500. But I think the A340 was better than the MD-11, as it was a new design where the MD-11 was essentially an upgrade of the old DC-10.

A world without the 777 seems strange, it's just so successful and used that I struggle thinking of what would have happened without it. That said, the A340 in all its guises has been a good aircraft, just not as good as the 777, and the same goes for the MD-11.
 
ripcordd
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2000 1:12 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:11 pm

It wouldn't have there would have been a MD-12 that would have sold a lot
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 6429
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:15 pm

Quoting ripcordd (Reply 8):
It wouldn't have there would have been a MD-12 that would have sold a lot

Which one? The Trijet or the Quad?
 
slcdeltarumd11
Posts: 4383
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 7:30 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:19 pm

Of course if there was one less option, it would have sold more. Less options for airlines. Would it have been a runaway hit, i doubt. Its too thirsty, isnt it? I would think the A330 would have had more of a sales increase then the MD11 just a few years later.
 
User avatar
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1929
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:58 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 6):
The other thing to remember is that there was a recession in the early 90s that hit the 340/MD-11 more so than the 777 that hit the shelves later.

I think that's an important point that gets overlooked. Just off the top of my head: -

* Northwest Airlines had A340s on order - deferred and added used DC-10s then took A330s.
* Continental Airlines had A330s and A340s on order - cancelled; added used DC-10s and then ordered 767s and 777s.
* Air Europe had RR Trent powered MD-11s on order - airline collapsed and order was cancelled.
* TWA had RR Trent A330s on order - deferred and evntually cancelled (as part of A318 order if I recall).

I think the 777 also helped turn airlines off the 747 before the 77W came on the scene. When Boeing offered the 747-500 and 747-600 using 777 technology and airlines didn't like the price. Then in the late 1990s airlines started dropping 747 orders, e.g. BA who cancelled a number of 747-400 orders and took 777-236ERs instead (RR powered because the cancelled 747s were to have had RB211-524s).

Things could have looked very different in the late 1990s: -

* NW operating A340s (and 747-400s) vice A330s.
* CO operating A330s and A340s vice 767s and 777s.
* TW operating A330s vice 747 classics and 767-300s.
* AA still operating MD-11s vice 777s (possibly a very big fleet given their 43 777-223ERs).
* DL still operating MD-11s vice 777s (Had 15 at the peak, but could have been 20+).

It would have been interesting to see what UA did regarding replacing the DC-10 (That was what the 777 was partly for).

BA might well have gone for A340s to replace the LGW DC-10s (as well as give it something between the 767-336ER and 747-436).

SQ might have followed the CX route and gone straight for A330s as a regional aircraft (The 777 replaced the A310 on a lot of routes). I also wonder if there was no 777-300 whether we could have seen CX and SQ order 747-400Ds for use on regional Asian flights.
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
UA444
Posts: 2783
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:11 pm

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 10):

The A330 at that point could not do what an MD-11 could. And Airbus itself wasn't as established.

[Edited 2015-09-03 15:11:27]
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21562
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:27 pm

First of all, "If the 777 hadn't been built" is a bit of nonsense. At some point, a widebody twin with capabilities like the 777 would have been built. Now, note that the MD-11 was introduced in 1989 or 1990 and the 772 was introduced in 1997, so there was a significant lag between the two models. In spite of that, the MD-11 sold poorly because it was a sub-par aircraft. Its fuel burn was above promised and thus its range was below promised. There are many things McD could have done to make it work, but they didn't and the MD-11 really killed the company. In fact, SQ canceled theirs because they didn't meet performance guarantees and took the A340 instead.

It's a pity because the MD-11 is such a gorgeous aircraft, but unfortunately looks don't win in this game (the A320 proves that  &nbsp , performance and economics do.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
bigb
Posts: 896
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:27 pm

I think we would have saw the 747-500/600/700s get built
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6512
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:29 pm

Someone, most likely Airbus or MD, would have built a big twin if Boeing hadn't. MD had thought up a two-engine version of the MD-11, and it might have been built.

But if no one had, the A340 was clearly the best product in the longhaul market before the 777 came out, and the A340 would have outcompeted the trijet MD-11.
 
777way
Topic Author
Posts: 6470
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 1:38 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:36 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
First of all, "If the 777 hadn't been built" is a bit of nonsense. At some point, a widebody twin with capabilities like the 777 would have been built. Now, note that the MD-11 was introduced in 1989 or 1990 and the 772 was introduced in 1997,

Well Airbus didnt have any plans for such but MD sure did think of it, also the 772 first flew in 94/95.
 
dc10lover
Posts: 1535
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:11 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Thu Sep 03, 2015 10:36 pm

767 - 300 / 400 would be more popular than the MD - 11. Remember, twin engines are better than three.
Why endure the nightmare and congestion of LAX when BUR, LGB, ONT & SNA is so much easier to fly in and out of. Same with OAK & SJC when it comes to SFO.
 
User avatar
zippyjet
Posts: 5110
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 12:06 am

Quoting 777way (Thread starter):

Good question. However it seems 3 holers are persona non grata. With the current technology and fuel saving going on the MD-11 could still be an anachronism even without the tripple 7. Airbus would have probably come out with something similar to a 777.
I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6981
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 12:25 am

Without the 777 on the way there would likely be no MD-11 as we know it today. But there would have been many more MD-11s, only a different plane with a new and longer wing.

With the 340 and 777 on the way, and with MD's financial state, there was no bank ready to finance a new wing for the MD-11, so they had to do it on the cheap, or not at all.

They knew what was needed. Already in the late 70'es they were working on the "DC-10 Super 60 Series". Three stretched DC-10 variants (-61, -62 and -63) of which the two latter were long range planes with a roughly 30 feet wing span increase.

It came to nothing at that time due to lack of funding. Lockheed's struggle to stay in the airliner business with their Tristar also didn't make the banks more eager to dump money on MD.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
Max Q
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 12:47 am

There's a significant issue that is being forgotten here.


The MD11's safety (or lack of it) record, if many more had been sold there would have been
more incidents and / or crashes.


This would have limited any more orders, as it did already, it was never a big hit with passenger airlines anyway.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
Okie
Posts: 4025
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 1:08 am

ETOPS-120 killed the MD-11 which was followed pretty quickly with ETOPS-180.
ETOPS-120 incorporated most Atlantic crossings and 180 incorporated about 90% of the earth.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 19):
With the 340 and 777 on the way, and with MD's financial state, there was no bank ready to finance a new wing for the MD-11, so they had to do it on the cheap, or not at all

MD missed original performance targets by a pretty good margin. I am not sure MD ever satisfied AA.
The fuel burn was higher than expected largely because of the poor wing and a generation behind in engine technology.
Something had to give burning more fuel cost money along with giving up payload or distance.

I believe the first 777 was delivered about mid 95 off the production line with ETOPS-180 using 10%+ less fuel than the MD-11

Okie
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12505
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 1:14 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
and the 772 was introduced in 1997

1995

772ER was 1997
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21562
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 6:24 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 22):
1995

772ER was 1997

The general convention is that the 77A refers to the 777-200 base model and the 772 refers to the 777-200ER, which was stretched to make the 773. The 77L refers to the 777-200LR and the 77W to the 777-300ER.

The 77A was a DC-10 replacement capable of flying TATL routes and transcontinental routes. While it could do SFO-NRT, it was a bit of a push for that model. The MD-11 could do 12-13 hour routes. The 772 is a 14+ hour aircraft.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
Ferroviarius
Posts: 254
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 3:28 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:59 am

Quoting 777way (Thread starter):
Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Under any so called "normal circumstances": No!

If the 777 would not have been built, Boeing would sooner or later have built something else, "777 alternative", and more modern and better than the MD11. This is NOT a statement against the MD11, which was a child of its time as was - and still is - the 777.

The question "Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?" is nevertheless interesting. Had their been a deep crisis situation of a very special type, where Boeing - or other potential competitors - would not have had the strength to develop a new airplane, construction of the MD11 - possibly with minor improvements - would have continued if there at the same time had been the market for an airplane of its size and with is specifications. Of course, the next question then would be: "Could there have been this market in a crisis so deep that even Boeing (or a comparable competitor) would not have had the strength to construct a new plane?" Moving on in this thread of thinking, the question will soon change to : "Could there have been this market in a crisis so deep that even the United States of America would not have had the strength to construct a new plane?"


This is, to my mind, one aspect of the issue.

Another aspect is:

For which period of time in service should one design any product?

An example:

In Europe, before WWII and after WWII electric locomotives were build so solid that they would be operable during at least (!) 50 years. In both Switzerland and Germany, there are at this time electric locomotives in daily use and on high prestige trains, which are very close to 50 years in age. The Ae3/6 I in Switzerland had been in use for more than 70 years. Quite a lot of contemporanean economists are "angry" that our fathers built that long lasting machines. They are much too good in shape to be scrapped (there had even been a lot of protests when a former DB CEO scrapped a series of heavy goods locos simply because they had become un-economical and although they still were in excellent shape, and he even refused to sell them to others because others might have been able to use them, in another economic context, at reduced cost and better revenue), but more modern engines would perform far better in terms of cost vs. revenue.

A third aspect:
As an example from the airplane industry, I consider the L-1011. As far as I know - and has been written here several times - it was designed and built for about twice the lifetime and start-land cycles than any other plane of its time. It was technologically even far ahead of the DC-10. Nevertheless, it finished its career earlier than the latter, in spite of the fact that it was technologically better. But the 777 does not seem to suffer from this L-1011 syndrome, possibly because it did not experience so fundamental problems as the L-1011 (e.g. RB211 problem).


Ultimately:
Should we try to solve the problems of future generations? In how far are we able to do that? How far should we think ahead? When does our "thinking ahead" start to become a dis-advantage rather than an advantage for future generations?

Lot's of interesting and difficult questions are hidden in your question, 777way.

Best wishes and have a nice weekend!

Ferroviarius
 
User avatar
cathay747
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:47 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 11:49 am

Many good/valid points made above, and I especially like this one:

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 11):
It would have been interesting to see what UA did regarding replacing the DC-10 (That was what the 777 was partly for).

...indeed...UA could have been the wild-card in the success of the MD-11,
and without the 777, I could easily have seen UA use the MD-11 to replace
their entire DC-10 fleet.

But one thing not really touched on in all the above comments is...with no
777, not only do I think that the MD-11 would have sold better, there also
would have been no 764ER! That airplane was designed essentially as a
replacement for the DC-10, and as we all know sold very poorly...only CO
& DL, who did in fact use it as a DC-10 replacement...and with no 777 or
764ER we likely would have seen another MD-11 customer in the form of
KQ, who had decided on the 764ER but then changed their mind to the 777.

All delightful speculation, but of course as pointed out above, the MD-11's
performance shortfalls, at least initially, would have been a huge factor...
however, with greater orders, McD might have been able to get the finance
needed to improve it to a much greater degree.
Try a Little VC-10derness
 
jfk777
Posts: 7052
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 12:06 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 7):
A world without the 777 seems strange, it's just so successful and used that I struggle thinking of what would have happened without it. That said, the A340 in all its guises has been a good aircraft, just not as good as the 777, and the same goes for the MD-11.

If Boeing didn't build the 777 another bigger then 767 twin would have been Boeing built. MD-11 might have sold more but it was still an old design with new engines while the A340 was new.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 11):
* Northwest Airlines had A340s on order - deferred and added used DC-10s then took A330s.
* Continental Airlines had A330s and A340s on order - cancelled; added used DC-10s and then ordered 767s and 777s.

The reasons for the NW A340 and Continental A330 & A340 cancellations were the bad economy at the time. Continental purchased Boeing because of Gordon Bethune's long relationship with Boeing. Boeing also loaned Continental some money at some point at the time and the order was a pay back for that favor.
 
stratacruiser
Posts: 232
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:07 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 1:22 pm

The Comet 4 would have been more popular if the 707 wasn't built as well....superior technology and innovation keeps happening, leaving older, previously state-of-the art technology in it's wake. If innovation in engine technology hadn't occurred to make ETOPs possible, sure, tri and quad jets would still be popular today.
 
spyglass
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 3:17 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 1:31 pm

Many opinions here.....isn't it wonderful to just speculate about things we're all interested in? However, there are, and have been, certain individuals whose opinions carried sufficient weight to make things happen....or prevent them. Such a one was Bob Crandall. He wasn't a MD11 fan because of the 3 engines (same with the couple SP's leased for the initial DFW-NRT rte....nothing else was available just then). If MD had cooked up a reworked domestic 10 with a pair of the big CF6-80's and maybe 6ft added to the wingtips, along w/winglets, kept the MTOW under 450k, that likely would've been a hot item, due to the many existing 10 operators. Ditto a reworked -30, an advanced -80 powerplant (say 66k lbs thrust), fuel increase and kept MTOW under 500k, that too might have a keeper.

That said, it should be noted that after Bob C climbed all over the MD folks about performance shortfalls, even when their "fixes" were added to the -11 (and that exceeded the stated spec by about 5%) and DFW-NRT and other long rtes were within easy reach, he still wanted nothing but twins, due to maintenence costs.
I remember when......a plane trip was a big deal.
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 1:44 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 23):

The general convention is that the 77A refers to the 777-200 base model and the 772 refers to the 777-200ER, which was stretched to make the 773. The 77L refers to the 777-200LR and the 77W to the 777-300ER.

I thought the convention is 772 for 777-200 base non-ER, then "77E" for the 777-200ER

but usually i just type 772A and 773A to avoid any confusion
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26404
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 2:24 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 23):
The general convention is that the 77A refers to the 777-200 base model and the 772 refers to the 777-200ER, which was stretched to make the 773.
Quoting jetblue1965 (Reply 29):
I thought the convention is 772 for 777-200 base non-ER, then "77E" for the 777-200ER.

That has been my recollection based on posting histories on the site, as well.
 
ExL10Mktg
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:39 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:20 pm

There's no simple answer to a question like this as there are many variables. Increased sales of other aircraft, perhaps another manufacturer developing a 777-like alternative, etc. One wrinkle yet to be mentioned: how about the L-1011? Wouldn't there have been more interest in it as well? Maybe Lockheed would have stayed in the commercial field, maybe not. The program was offered to Boeing as the exit was being contemplated. They weren't interested because the 777 was under development, a DC-10/L-1011 size fuselage with 2 engines. How would they have reacted if the 777 was not in the pipeline? An L-1011 marketed by Boeing would have been formidable competition for the flawed MD-11!
 
brilondon
Posts: 3046
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 4:26 pm

Quoting 777way (Thread starter):

Just wondering, if its been discussed before then delete the topic.

Of course it has, but I like it when we can discuss with a person who has something new to offer or to think it through more thoroughly and have a different opinion.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
The A340-300 certainly would have sold better, though I think the pressure on Airbus to improve the A330-300's operating weights to make it more capable would have been much less (as they would have pushed customers to the A340-300).
Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 10):
I would think the A330 would have had more of a sales increase then the MD11 just a few years later.
Quoting zippyjet (Reply 18):
Airbus would have probably come out with something similar to a 777.

Airbus would not have an updated A330 but would have left it with the two original engines that powered it. Since this is still just a hypothetical situation here is how I see it happening:

A330 a regional airliner as originally intentioned.
A340-300/400/500/600 would still be in production as ultra long haul aircraft competing with the 747.
767-300/400 would have still been the aircraft that filled the niche.
There would have been no development of the A350.
The 747 would still be "queen of the skies" and still have a backlog of orders.
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
User avatar
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1929
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 6:15 pm

Quoting cathay747 (Reply 25):
But one thing not really touched on in all the above comments is...with no 777, not only do I think that the MD-11 would have sold better, there also would have been no 764ER! That airplane was designed essentially as a replacement for the DC-10, and as we all know sold very poorly...only CO & DL, who did in fact use it as a DC-10 replacement...and with no 777 or 764ER we likely would have seen another MD-11 customer in the form of
KQ, who had decided on the 764ER but then changed their mind to the 777.

The 764 as we know it might not have been built, but I don't think it can be said that no 767-400 would have been built. Before it decided on the clean sheet 777 Boeing offered that odd 767/757 hybrid!
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
ECFlyer
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 7:55 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:30 pm

I was on one of the very first 772 TPAC flights (in J, on promotional tickets my company received to highlight the service). Although we forget about it now, the whole cabin was abuzz that we were crossing the Pacific on only TWO engines.

I can imagine that the three/four engine standard might have lived on at most another decade, unless someone else built an aircraft similarly disruptive as the 777 within that time. Within ten years of the 777 launch, fuel prices ratified its basic layout as the de facto long haul layout for ever more...
 
S75752
Posts: 1464
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 8:37 pm

Could the MD-11 have supported 10-Abreast?
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 6429
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Fri Sep 04, 2015 8:46 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 35):
Could the MD-11 have supported 10-Abreast?

It was basically a DC-10 fuselage and it did support 10-abreast. Those of LTU, World Airways and the very first two MD-11 of DL leased in 1991 had the 10-accross in Y because they originally were intended for Air Europe, the UK charter/leisure airline. Finnair also had 10 seats in Y.
 
Max Q
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 5:49 am

Quoting ExL10Mktg (Reply 31):
One wrinkle yet to be mentioned: how about the L-1011? Wouldn't there have been more interest in it as well? Maybe Lockheed would have stayed in the commercial field, maybe not. The program was offered to Boeing as the exit was being contemplated.

That's interesting, I know that Boeing were impressed with the L1011 and admired the design, not something they would often admit, furthermore it would have filled a hole in their product line up at the time.



Fascinating to think how they could have developed the Tristar, an Aircraft that never really attained its full potential, it could easily have been stretched, re engined and been given a two pilot cockpit, it would d been a real competitor to the poorly engineered, problem plagued MD11.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
stratocruiser
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 3:41 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:06 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):

The MD11's safety (or lack of it) record, if many more had been sold there would have been
more incidents and / or crashes.


This would have limited any more orders, as it did already, it was never a big hit with passenger airlines anyway.

I agree. Leaving aside the economics of 3 engines vs 2 or 4, the MD-11 from it's early days had the reputation amongst pilots of not being the easiest of aircraft to fly, particularly on landing. The Fed Ex accident in Japan a few years ago bears this out.
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 725
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 10:48 am

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 6):
SQ notably swapped from the MD-11 to the 340 when the former had issues.

I didn't think that SQ was a big Douglas user ever. before the 777s I remember them always flying the 747s and before that the 707 when they started flaying to Australia. I think I saw a picture of a DC-10 in SQ colours, when did they fly them and where did they fly them to?
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 6429
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 11:30 am

Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 39):
I think I saw a picture of a DC-10 in SQ colours, when did they fly them and where did they fly them to?

They flew DC-10 from 1978 to 1983 to Japan, ZRH, LAX and/or SFO. I believe they choose to concentrate on the 747 for long-haul and the A300 for wide-body Asian routes, at least for a while. One has to remember they did with their fleet what EK did and still does later too.
 
Max Q
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 12:15 pm

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 40):
Quoting Flyingsottsman (Reply 39):
I think I saw a picture of a DC-10 in SQ colours, when did they fly them and where did they fly them to?

They flew DC-10 from 1978 to 1983 to Japan, ZRH, LAX and/or SFO. I believe they choose to concentrate on the 747 for long-haul and the A300 for wide-body Asian routes, at least for a while.

Not only that but SIA inaugurated service to the US with the DC10 operating into SFO, tech stopping in Hong Kong or Seoul.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 3:45 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):

Agreed. Once the MD-11 met it's performance targets, it likely would have sold better, especially to existing large DC-10 customers who were using it on long-haul flights.
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13):
In spite of that, the MD-11 sold poorly because it was a sub-par aircraft. Its fuel burn was above promised and thus its range was below promised. There are many things McD could have done to make it work, but they didn't and the MD-11 really killed the company. I
Quoting Okie (Reply 21):
The fuel burn was higher than expected largely because of the poor wing and a generation behind in engine technology.
Something had to give burning more fuel cost money along with giving up payload or distance.

As I recall, at the time, the MD-11 came in over it's projected weight (don't remember the numbers but it was significant) and then, MD offered the operators a special package to rectify the weight problems, but wanted the operators to pay for it. Pretty cheeky. Not sure if anyone ever took them up on the problem. I'm pretty sure DL didn't.


Pretty coincidental, but the C-17 also came in over it's projected weights. MD seems to have had an engineering problem, or it was more of a problem of promising too much without actually know if they could meet the promises.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
by738
Posts: 2997
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 7:59 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 7:12 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 20):

That is my issue with this aircraft. Perhaps there might have been more incidents that would have exposed the instability issues.
I dont think BA would have ordered A340's
Not sure why there wouldnt have been a 777 but Boeing would have come up with something
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5459
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 10:43 pm

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 19):
But there would have been many more MD-11s, only a different plane with a new and longer wing.

My understanding is that the McDonnell management was against spending the money for a new wing; however it may well be that it would have been very difficult for them to raise the money.

One point not mentioned yet is that the 777 required engines larger than anything built before, and larger than many people thought possible at the time. Boeing was really the only airframe manufacturer with the clout to get the enginemakers to build an engine that big (and all 3 of them did.) I do not think they would have done so for either MD or Airbus.

As to the main question, if Boeing had not built the 777 I do think the main beneficiary would have been the A340; it was clearly superior to the MD-11 and would have trounced it just like the 77W later trounced the A346. But Boeing would have done something else, like build the 777. They would not have left the gap between the 767 and 747 unfilled.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9063
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 11:01 pm

I guess the other point would be the fact that they were separate companies, Boeing was loosing ground with the 767, the -400 did not garner much interest, so something was going to get built.
The line up was the 767-300ER / 400 then the 747, the 777 was placed in-between, a better 767 and an obvious competitor to the MD-11, just wonder why they did not start with the better ranged 200ER.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sat Sep 05, 2015 11:47 pm

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 36):
Finnair also had 10 seats in Y.

I believe only a couple of AY MD-11s mainly used on leisure routes were 10-abreast in the entire Y cabin. The others were 9-abreast in the forward Y cabin and 10-abreast in the rear cabin.
 
User avatar
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1929
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sun Sep 06, 2015 10:43 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 44):
As to the main question, if Boeing had not built the 777 I do think the main beneficiary would have been the A340; it was clearly superior to the MD-11 and would have trounced it just like the 77W later trounced the A346. But Boeing would have done something else, like build the 777. They would not have left the gap between the 767 and 747 unfilled.

But Boeing did leave the gap unfilled in the past, which is why the L1011 and DC-10 came along. For quite a while in the late 1980s Boeing was offering 767 derivatives. If they'd produced one that got enough airline interest they would have gone with that, and there would have been no 777 (at least in the early 1990s). Remember, the 747SP only came about once Lockheed and Douglas started developing their products from being transcontinental planes to intercontinental ones and Boeing wanted to offer something smaller than the 747-200B.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 44):
One point not mentioned yet is that the 777 required engines larger than anything built before, and larger than many people thought possible at the time. Boeing was really the only airframe manufacturer with the clout to get the enginemakers to build an engine that big (and all 3 of them did.) I do not think they would have done so for either MD or Airbus.

Which is exactly why Airbus came up with the A330/A340 solution, offering the A330 as a TriStar 1/100 and DC-10-10 replacement and the A340 as a TriStar 200/500, DC-10-30/-40 and 747-100/-200B replacement. It's why I wonder whether United, without a 777 to launch, might have been tempted by the A330/A340 for domestic/international operations, or if it might have gone for a 767/MD-11 approach.
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
Max Q
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sun Sep 06, 2015 11:08 am

Quoting par13del (Reply 45):
I guess the other point would be the fact that they were separate companies, Boeing was loosing ground with the 767, the -400 did not garner much interest, so something was going to get built.
The line up was the 767-300ER / 400 then the 747, the 777 was placed in-between, a better 767 and an obvious competitor to the MD-11, just wonder why they did not start with the better ranged 200ER.

I think your chronology is a little inaccurate, the 777 was developed and produced before the 767-400 and was already a major hit.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 47):
But Boeing did leave the gap unfilled in the past, which is why the L1011 and DC-10 came along. For quite a while in the late 1980s Boeing was offering 767 derivatives. If they'd produced one that got enough airline interest they would have gone with that, and there would have been no 777 (at least in the early 1990s). Remember, the 747SP only came about once Lockheed and Douglas started developing their products from being transcontinental planes to intercontinental ones and Boeing wanted to offer something smaller than the 747-200B.

Agree, on more than one occasion Boeing has been forced to develop an aircraft to cover a gap in its product line they neglected, as you say they did this with the 747SP, 777 and later with the 737NG
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

RE: Would MD11 Be Popular If 777 Wasnt Built?

Sun Sep 06, 2015 11:41 am

Definitely McDonnell would be going ahead with a stretched MD-11, the MD-XX.

http://d121tcdkpp02p4.cloudfront.net/clim/49303/md-xx.jpg

[Edited 2015-09-06 04:47:18]
"What good are wings without the courage to fly?" - Atticus

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