It's typical of Pilots to defend the Aircraft they fly, a long association with a particular type builds a type of loyalty to it, I understand and completely respect that attitude.
At the time I flew another aircraft, I did not defend it, didn't like it at all, albeit being on it. But then I was decried a dinosaur. So what to do ....
However, the accident record of the MD11 speaks for itself, no other widebody aircraft has had such a record of crashes that can be directly linked to stability issues
True maybe, but you state that based on what?? (Statistics ....)
I actually agree a little bit, stability is twitchy, but it can be handled with adequate pilot skills.
Now what about the record of another design, i.e. the 330/340? Compared to its competitor it's just as abysmal. It can be linked to it's controls and protections design.
Again, true maybe, but I state that based on what?? (Statistics ....)
You see what I mean? Anyone is entitled to an opinion, but it's not necessarily the whole truth.
The Airbus design is religiously upheld here, no design flaw ever even considered. The pilots are always at fault because they are not up to the holy Airbus task.
Give the Maddog the same credit!!
Again, 13 years on it, no hard landing, no bounce.
Aerodynamics are somewhat delicate, agreed, but what a cockpit design and layout!
