Remembering the DC-10: End of an era or good riddance?

[spooky3]

Remembering the DC-10: End of an era or good riddance?

What do you think?

BBC News - Remembering the DC-10: End of an era or good riddance? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-26259236)

[avoman]

It was unpopular with Maintenance. Everything was more difficult than it should have been.

[mr Q]

PAL & JAL flew them regularly on their HK routes. Not nearly as advanced or capable as the Lockheed Tristar...but benefitted commercially by the early delays in getting the Tristar in the air
CX happily flew ex Eastern Airlines Tristars so I am biased in favour of the RR powered Lockheed

[MPH]

I thought it was a great plane. Nicest one to fly qua handling. This said after having only flown DC-8's, MD-11, B747 100'200 and B737 NG. :D

[finncapt]

Ex DC10 driver.

Did what it was designed to do - I enjoyed it.

Not as good as the VC10.

That should get the tongues wagging!!

[The Ancient Geek]

Indeed, the VC10 could get out of Joburg on a hot afternoon. The DC10 had
to wait until 2am with only enough fuel to get to Nairobi.

[barit1]

The DC-10/TriStar debate will never end, it seems.

But why did the DC-10 outsell the 1011 by nearly 2:1?

[ExXB]

The BBC story is a bit unfocused. The TK incident out of Paris, the AA incident at Chicago, the FX hijacking and the UT incident over Niger had decidedly different causes - the latter two could have occurred on any aircraft.

I hate reading stories written by people that have no idea what they are talking about.

[737ngpilot]

I loved the 10...best handling airliner I ever flew. I was fortunate to fly all series, the 10,15,30 and 40.
The 15 was a rocket, but the 30 was the machine of choice. The DC 10 was a mechanical nightmare to the maintenance folks, but for us pilots it was delight to fly

[DaveReidUK]

The TK incident out of Paris, the AA incident at Chicago, the FX hijacking and the UT incident over Niger had decidedly different causes - the latter two could have occurred on any aircraft.

Arguably the Chicago accident too, come to that.

[Skipness One Echo]

The TriStar was a domestic and medium haul beast for too long, the DC10-30 came to market long before the less capable L1011-200 and the long haul market was sewn up. 386 DC10s v 250 L1011 if you take the government mandated KC10 out.

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Laker DC10 Southern Bell | Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/plane_spotting_freak/4531616327/in/set-72157623883659430)

Best things about the DC10

Standby ticket was £10 (no such thing as APD in the good old days) - nearly always got on
Great view from jumpseat
Underfloor Galley Travel was great, didnt have to mix with Joe Public

[Spooky 2]

I was fortunate to fly both the L1011 and the DC10. The L1011 was hands down a nicer flying airplane than the DC10 but I suspect that the cost of operation was slightly higher. The fact that the L1011 did not come out with a real long range airplne until near the end of production really hurt Lockheed. Still an awsome flying airliner but even todays standards.:ok:

[nathanroberts2K8]

BBC News - Remembering the DC-10: End of an era or good riddance? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-26259236)

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Arguably the Chicago accident too, come to that.

I thought the slat retraction when the hydraulic lines were severed by the departing engine was something that could only have happened on the '10. Didn't other airliners had mechanical locks to hold the slats extended, the '10 relying on hydraulic pressure to hold them extended?

[Una Due Tfc]

Don't forget Sioux City

[Fantome]

. . . that is in the BBC article if you bothered to read it

the Air New Zealand TE901 into Mount Erebus in 1979

this prang has had vast coverage here on proone and elsewhere
in books and articles and docos .. . . . . but nowhere is it
suggested that there was anything wrong with the aircraft's airframe or engines before
it made the CFIT.

even so there are those who contend that the accident investigators at the site could have been more thorough in picking through the wreckage. none of the engines were retrieved for instance . . . . . which in itself later wound up a few conspiracy theorists

this is not the place to reopen this huge can of worms. . . . just like to hear briefly from anyone who may have some specific and cogent thoughts on this subject

[awblain]

Both.

Although, it's interesting that it almost managed to outlive its successor in passenger service.

The whole story won't be over until KLM put that out to pasture.
Looks like there's World Airways still using it too ?

[Una Due Tfc]

Sioux City aint in that article Fantome.....

[Capetonian]

Purely from a passenger perspective, a horrible bloody plane. Noisy and a lot of movement if you were in the tail section. KLM operated the D1M combi with the cargo in the tail section, and that short stubby cabin.

Its successor the MD11 was not much better.

[GAZIN]

As a fairly infrequent flyer I would rate the DC10 very highly from a passenger point of view, the 10's that I flew on, Laker, Continental, Northwest, THY, BA even FedEx were all quiet and smooth. In contrast I crossed the Atlantic both ways on a Delta Tristar and both rides were quite unpleasant. The only flight I can think of as quiet as the DC10's was the upper deck on a 747-300, tourist class.
The tail is not an ideal place to put an engine from a maintenance point of view, but apart from that I have not found the 10, or indeed the 11, difficult to fix, I can think of quite a few aircraft that are much worse.

[sb_sfo]

Although, it's interesting that it almost managed to outlive its successor in passenger service.

JAL kept at least 1 DC-10 in service after they retired all their MD11s.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

The front end of G-DMCA (ex-Monarch) lives on at the Manchester Runway Visitor Park.

[barit1]

The 1989 AA DC-10-10 Sioux City accident initiated with a forging fault in the #2 fan disk, no different in principle from the DL MD-88 Pensicola (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Air_Lines_Flight_1288) accident. Of course the train of events after the disc burst was directly the result of DC-10 design shortcomings.

[LAS1997]

DC-10? Death Cruiser I seem to recall it was nicknamed. I only ever flew on it once with Monarch down to Cuba for a holiday; I am glad I experienced it because it was a very pleasant flight; the forward section of this aircraft is now displayed at the AVP Manchester. I did feel un-easy about flying in it following the accidents it was involved in, THY 1974 near Paris, AA Chicago 1979, United at Sioux City; perhaps this is an un-fair comment; but these accidents along with the Air New Zealand crash on Erebus (not the aircraft's fault I admit) did nothing for the publics confidence in the aircraft.

[Fantome]

reference Sioux City - the article that the OP cited does have a link in it to the Aviation Safety Network
with 53 accidents or incidents to type, including -

19-JUL-1989 (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19890719-1)DC-10-10 N1819U United Airlines 111 Sioux Gatewa... http://aviation-safety.net/database/country/flags_15/N.gif http://aviation-safety.net/graphics/C.gif A1

[LynxDriver]

I was lucky enough to fly on both the DC-10 and the Tristar. I did 10 flights on the DC-10 when in service with British Caledonian Charter, all were smooth and comfortable.
However, on the other hand all 6 flights I had on British Airtours Tristars were blighted with issues. Condensation pouring on my head, smoke from the galley, failed air conditioning, apu faults.

[dixi188]

Many years ago I worked on DC-10s at BCAL and remember the IFE system had lots of faults with under seat connectors.

Then in 2000 I took the family to Florida on holiday. I think it was JMC that we flew with on an ex BCAL DC-10. When the movie started several rows had no sound, so I asked one of the cabin crew to get the Flight Engineer to do some magic under the seats. The large chap crawled around a few rows until I shouted "that's it" when the sound came on, and he emerged very sweaty, looking to see who it was who new about this stuff. I didn't own up but settled down with the kids to watch the movie.

As an F/E myself, I'm sometimes glad I only flew cargo.

[Rick777]

I took my initial check ride as a brand new DC10 Flight Engineer on the same day as the Sioux City crash. As soon as the sim landed the guy giving me my check bolted. The guy in the left seat turned around in his seat and said "congratulations on passing your check and now for the bad news". The guy giving me the check had a daughter who was a flight attendant who often flew 232 the flight that crashed, and he went to check on her.
The 10 had the largest most comfortable cockpit I was ever in. It did have a lot of minor problems in the back though, and I often had to go back and reset circuit breakers or something. Don't know how that would work out with today's security stuff. Overall I really enjoyed my time on the plane.

[mustafagander]

Destination Disaster is a good read.

[Heathrow Harry]

"the Air New Zealand TE901 into Mount Erebus in 1979

even so there are those who contend that the accident investigators at the site could have been more thorough in picking through the wreckage. none of the engines were retrieved for instance . . . . . which in itself later wound up a few conspiracy theorists"

Have they seen any pictures of the crash site? Half way up a volcano in the Antarctic?????? Just how you'd move anything safely from there is almost impossible to imagine - and the kit would all have to be mobbed from New Zealand as well...........

I'm amazed they achieved what they did - and a lot of the guys involved were just scientists down there to do something completely different, not bagging up bodies and bits and searching the snowfield for important clues.....

PS I always disliked being a passenger on the DC-10 quite uncomfortable and noisy

[WHBM]

While the initial concept was fine, when it came down to doing the detailed design of systems etc the DC-10 seems very much to have been done by the B-team.

Come the MD-11 and this lot seem to have made their way up into the top jobs ......

Long Beach was unfortunately always like this after Donald Douglas' departure. As the old saying goes :

"The best aircraft would be one designed by Lockheed, built by Boeing, and with Sales & Marketing by Mc DD"

[Anilv]

Remember working on Sabena flights ex-SIN in the late 80s, these were combis with the cargo ahead of the pax. Aircraft were OO-SLA/B/C/D/E..

I remember something like 4 pallets in the maindeck. It was a bitch for ground handling.... a/c comes in, deplane all pax, remove the bridge, position the hi-lift, unload / load the main deck (after the lower aft is emptied), remove the hilift and re-position the pax bridge. All in about 80 minutes. (steps were positioned at the rear doors).

Repeat all along the route and it was a looong route.. something like SIN/KUL/BKK/BOM/AUH/BRU.

Crews were nice and friendly... quite tolerant of the loaders walking thru their nice clean cabin..

Anil

[DozyWannabe]

While the initial concept was fine, when it came down to doing the detailed design of systems etc the DC-10 seems very much to have been done by the B-team.

Come the MD-11 and this lot seem to have made their way up into the top jobs

That's as good a theory as any, but I reckon it's more complex. Douglas's reputation seems to have been founded on a tendency to be fairly conservative technology-wise, and to build aircraft which were structurally sturdy ("keep 'em simple, build 'em tough"). Given that, it's unsurprising that a lot of pilots were enamoured of their birds.

As I understand it though, for various reasons including spiralling development costs for the DC-10 and being woefully behind on deliveries of -8s and -9s, Douglas was losing money hand over fist by the mid-late '60s and desperately needed the McD buyout to stay in business. The subsequent restructuring brought the project back under control financially, but I suspect that some of the savings came from increasing the amount of subcontracted work without a consequent increase of oversight and communication. Combine this with an almost pathological focus on beating Lockheed to market above all else, and the fact that an aircraft this large (and therefore more complex) was a new thing to even the experienced designers, and you have a recipe for things to potentially go badly wrong.

While the MD-11 was in development, the company was again on the ropes and was forced to "make do" and keep costs down, resulting in an underwhelming product.

Just my tuppence, anyway...

[Anilv]

A few more memories of working with the DC-10..

- The holds were slightly smaller (shorter) than a 747.. officially the max height was 64ins on a 747/airbii/DC-10/MD11 but on the 747 you could get away with 65 and a bit inches. On the DC-10 it would get snagged on the pressure relief door cage.

- Early DC-10s had a shutter (Shuttle?) bar instead of container locks. This was the work of the devil and was the source of much hatred.

- The pax doors on the DC-10 were good for ground handling... you need not worry about the doors hitting the jetway/steps.\

- The door for the aft bulk compt was not designed to be opened by a guy standing on the belt-loader. We did it anyway, operating the switch while keeping your body away from the door (hanging off the belt loader) as it it opnened. You could hold on to the door but keep you thumb away from the edge. I know we were supposed to uses stairs but come onnn..

- Some DC-10s could only take LD3s in the forward. We would plan pallets in the forward as the plan was for a plane which could take them would be operating the next day. When we came to work the next day we had 5 lower deck pallets but a last minute change meant that an aircraft with LD3 only lower holds was coming in.... messy.

- The main-deck door controls were weird... you had to unlatch from the inside, come back to the galley, open door 1L, open a hatch on the floor, pull and twist a lever until the door fully opened. 747 was wayyyy better... a little electrical switch .

Anil

[akerosid]

Yesterday, March 3, marked the 40th anniversary of the Turkish DC10 crash at Ermonville Forest, outside Paris.

This was, of course, the worst DC10 crash by some distance, the American and ANZ crashes being next in terms of fatalities. It was probably the incident which really focused media attention on the DC10, from which it never really recovered; the American DC10 crash - which resulted, unfairly, in the aircraft being grounded for a time - sealed its fate. Only a small number of DC10s were sold after that incident (excluding the USAF KC10s).

By the time of the ORY crash, the 747 still had a clean safety record (although it was to lose it within less than a year; the LH crash at NBO occurred in November 1974); the L1011 had suffered a crash near Miami in 1972, but that was known to be a crew error rather than an aircraft fault).

Unfortunately, as we know, once the media gets a sniff of a problem, it focuses on an aircraft and after Paris, it never really released its target lock on the DC10.

It's hard to say "good riddance"; it was a popular aircraft with flight crews, with the large cockpit windows being particularly popular.

[Fris B. Fairing]

Anilv

Yes it was the shuttle bar. Initially, the in-hold system in the DC-10 was a pleasant change after the 747. The hold had a nice flat floor without the deep "bilges" of the 747 which used to accumulate all manner of rubbish. Ostensibly the DC-10 in-hold system was designed for maximum flexibility. If I recall correctly, the ULDs were restrained by the fixed end stops at one end and the shuttle bar with flip-up locks behind it at the other. The ULDs were simply butted up against one another. Problems soon arose when pallets with warped edges began to override one another - "shingling" as they called it. With several empty pallets adjoining, fore and aft restraint was lost if pallets began to overlap. The solution was to fit all pallets with override blocks but it was a band-aid fix at best.

[WHBM]

I suspect another of the issues was that the former Douglas management was in Long Beach, and all the top execs saw the plant, and the production on the ramp, every day. Come McDonnell Douglas and the top team were 2,000 miles away in St Louis, and lost contact with what the customers actually pay them for, namely putting aircraft together.

Please remind me, is there any other major manufacturer who would move their head office from being in the same urban area as their plants, with everyone driving on the freeway past their output every day, to somewhere 2,000 miles away ............ ?

[gruntie]

The rear end - the No 2 engine installation - always looked unfinished, and done in a hurry on the DC, whereas the Tristar looked much more complete.

The Tristar however only had overhead lockers on the outside: none in the centre, so there was always a fight for them, as there were too few for the numbers on board. (A bit like the lifeboats on the Titanic I suppose).

But then an experienced engineer told me that long dark nights in the hangar maintaining Tristars were enlivened, on occasion of removing the centre engine, by placing a mattress on the hangar floor and using the engine intake as a rudimentary helter-skelter.

I quite went off it after that.

[NineEighteen]

A Continental DC-10 was my first wide body flight. Gatwick to Houston in the late 80's and I thoroughly enjoyed it so she'll always have a special place in my heart.

I always had the feeling that she gave a smooth flight both that time and when I flew a few more times in later years. I have much the same impression of the triple seven nowadays. For passenger comfort, I've not known much better.

[evansb]

Flew on a UTA DC-10 from KLAX to NTAA (Faaa International Airport) Papeete, Tahiti, back in 1976. Beautiful flight, beautiful stewardesses, great in-flight service.
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r68/convair640/convair640033/BYE_BYE_DC10_zps0203d320.jpg

[tonytales]

The Lockheed L1011 was a luckier aircraft than the DC-10. The L1011 had two fan disk failures earlier on. I met the Eastern Air one at KJFK. The whole front of Nbr 3 had departed. There was a fan blade sticking into a passenger window penetrating the outer pane but not the inner. I believe it was TWA that had the other. All due to bad fan disk forgings, problems with the titanium. FAA didn't ground them but put a very short cycle limit on them and we became very proficient at changing fan disks. The two incidents never made much publicity as there were no pax injuries. Had the mass of the disk gone into the fuselage the press would have been all over it. Shee luck.

Later, in early 80's AN EAL L1011 tossed a nbr 2 fan disk. I stepped through the hole on the port side, the starboard hole was too jagged. Having four hydraulic systems saved the plane. Three were severed and U/S but the fourth, although dented, didn't let go. Had it done so there would have been no attempted landing. The flying stabilizer would have gone ANU or AND, an inside or an outside loop and that would have been it. Sheer luck or Grace of God if you please.

The RB211-22B suffered from Nbr 1 bearing fires resulting, if not immediately shutting down, in an uncontained fan disk release. They added fan grabbers and ultimately a detector to monitor bearing movement.

The L1011 had the best pax doors of any aircraft I worked on. The spring cartridge could be a hazard but it generally worked. Auto flight system stretched the state of the art. When working, the best and the pilots thought it one of the best flying aircraft of all time. Cockpit size, windows and general layout were good although the switchlights were a problem to maintain. Too frail for heavy fingers.

The elegant air inlet for nbr. 2 engine was sized for the Rolls engines. It was the smallest of the three big fans. It was impossible to fit GE or Pratts. This was a real problem when the Hyfil fan blades on the Rolls engines failed. Later we joked we were working an aircraft built by two bankrupt manufacturers.

Ultimately, the lack of growth potential in the design doomed it. Few were converted to freighters. Long range was achieved by shortening it. Even the -250 models did not match the DC-10 with its centerline gear.

So a lucky plane in that it avoided, initially, spectacular crashes but basically a domestic design with little freight potential.

[DaveReidUK]

The L1011 had two fan disk failures earlier on.Presumably these two:

NYC73AN125 (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=66700&key=0)

DCA81AA027 (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=27857&key=0)

Scary stuff.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

It wasn't 'luck' that the L1011 had 4 hydraulic systems, and it wasn't 'bad luck' that the '10 had the design defects it did which led to losses.

[tonytales]

I didn't imply it was "luck: that Lockheed had four hydraulic systems in the L1011. They had to provide redundancy for the flying stabilizer which gave the plane its superb handling. It was however "luck" that the fourth system was only dented and not pierced. That nbr. 2 engine fan disk had released and chewed its way forward right through the "S" duct and came apart just short of the rear pressure bulkhead. Had it continued just a short distance more it would have taken out the rear pressure bukhead and there would have been an explosive decompression. So that was "luck" too. There were a series of dings in the top of the stabilizer box where it marched forward.

It was also "luck" that sent the two defective disks away from the airplane instead of into the fuselage.

I agree that the DC-10 design of cable drives on the slat drives was not as good as the jackscrew systems on the L-1011. It too had its faults though and I saw several zero flap, zero slat landings at KJFK due to faults in the slat assymetry system. No real problem but a very fast landing at a flatter body angle than normal.

The L1011 was more advance than the DC-10. Its DLC system on landing let it maintain a constant body angle on approach so it looked like it was running on a set of rails. No pitching an porpoising in rough air the way other aircraft did to maintain their glide path.

[Passengerbob]

BBC News - DC-10 aircraft makes 'historic' final flight from Birmingham (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-26323216)