DC-10 and Tristar
Thank you WHBM for finding the final resting place of my old "friend" N311EA (S/N 1012). It is strange that one of the earliest L1011's outlived almost all the rest. Even more amazing when you consider it was a -1 with limited legs and structurally one of the heavy weights and not eligible for any upgrades. It had an evil reputation among Eastern's maintenance folks being the last of the hand-wired early beasts. After that they used made-up wiring looms that were more complete. Running Technical Services at JFK I spent a lot of time on that aircraft in troubleshooting. I never thought I would see it again when it became the first L1011 disposed of by Eastern but I ended up at Tradewinds and there she was.
One important factor in limiting L1011 sales was that Lockheed never offered combi or freight versions or if they did, they must not have been attractive. Very early on Douglas did and sold quite a few. The factory built freighters certainly served as models for all the ones that were converted.
Eastern studied the possibility of joining the Government CRAF program with the L-1011 but an engineering study I saw discouraged that.
It certainly had a comfortable cockpit and I spent a lot of hours on the jump seat enjoying the great view.
One important factor in limiting L1011 sales was that Lockheed never offered combi or freight versions or if they did, they must not have been attractive. Very early on Douglas did and sold quite a few. The factory built freighters certainly served as models for all the ones that were converted.
Eastern studied the possibility of joining the Government CRAF program with the L-1011 but an engineering study I saw discouraged that.
It certainly had a comfortable cockpit and I spent a lot of hours on the jump seat enjoying the great view.
I think I've found it on Google Earth, partially dismantled but still recognisable, in Dacca's version of Cockroach Corner. That's a Tristar on the far right, yes ?
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@23.85.../data=!3m1!1e3
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@23.85.../data=!3m1!1e3
It's hard to tell with no tail, but it could even be one of several Biman DC-10s that were scrapped at DAC.
Anyway, here's a nice film of S2-AET in happier days:
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,257
Received 151 Likes
on
94 Posts
DaveReidUK
You are correct it was Biman DC10 as I recall when last through there.
Regards
Mr Mac
You are correct it was Biman DC10 as I recall when last through there.
Regards
Mr Mac
Edit: Disregard, I see we're talking about the airframe in the Google Earth link. I can't help with that one.
Last edited by Jhieminga; 15th Dec 2017 at 18:11. Reason: Need to read the full thread before posting...
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's strange that some get the DC10 and Tristar mixed up on observations as I think the difference between the two are so obvious.
There is a nose of a Biman DC10-30 seen to the left in this photo of the partially dismantled Tristar.
There is a nose of a Biman DC10-30 seen to the left in this photo of the partially dismantled Tristar.
Given that it was a blurry aerial photo of an aircraft with the entire back end missing that led to the confusion, I think we can excuse the OP.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telling the difference between a TriStar and a DC-10 from above (or below) is fairly easy as the engines on the DC-10 are closer in than those on the TriStar. This was due to the centre engine location on the DC-10 resulting in a smaller rudder area, thus requiring the engines to be closer to the centre line to meet engine out control requirements. The TriStar's bigger rudder allowed the engines to be further out on the wings, to the benefit of wing bending relief and therefore structure weight. Just one of many examples of the TriStar's more sophisticated design.
Last edited by Alan Baker; 16th Dec 2017 at 14:56. Reason: Added info
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to clarify those airlines that operated both the Lockheed L10-11 and the McDonnell Douglas DC10 in all their variations as ordered or through mergers but not necessarily operating both in service simultaneously.
Air France
American Transair
Arrow Air
British Airways
Caledonian
Delta
Eastern
Hawaiian
Iberia
LTU
Pan Am
United
Air France
American Transair
Arrow Air
British Airways
Caledonian
Delta
Eastern
Hawaiian
Iberia
LTU
Pan Am
United
Used to enjoy meeting the Tri* crews at the then MPA and making a joint team for the Tuesday quiz run by the contractors' people. Big blokes they were - the workers.. The quiz team was called "If we don't win, we won't fly you home". Most weeks we didn't, but one week we won, and walked, well tiptoed, off with the proceeds, about £150 as I recall. Contractors not happy at all.
I did get the impression that the centre engine position of the Tristar was also a downside, as it prevented straightforward installation of larger engines as the model developed. I understand that the dimensions of the S-shaped inlet duct were the key issue here.
A lot of the Tristar (eg the S-duct) came from the Hawker Siddeley Trident, whose development ran down as the Tristar was building up. The senior engineers who moved across the Atlantic were a key part of the "brain drain" reports which were much publicised by government ministers in the late 1960s. The Autoland, FMS, and other sophisticated parts showed a number of examples from this background.
Hopefully all found the weather in Burbank (where the Tristar was designed, although assembled in Palmdale) a bit better than Hatfield.
A lot of the Tristar (eg the S-duct) came from the Hawker Siddeley Trident, whose development ran down as the Tristar was building up. The senior engineers who moved across the Atlantic were a key part of the "brain drain" reports which were much publicised by government ministers in the late 1960s. The Autoland, FMS, and other sophisticated parts showed a number of examples from this background.
Hopefully all found the weather in Burbank (where the Tristar was designed, although assembled in Palmdale) a bit better than Hatfield.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did get the impression that the centre engine position of the Tristar was also a downside, as it prevented straightforward installation of larger engines as the model developed. I understand that the dimensions of the S-shaped inlet duct were the key issue here.
A lot of the Tristar (eg the S-duct) came from the Hawker Siddeley Trident, whose development ran down as the Tristar was building up. The senior engineers who moved across the Atlantic were a key part of the "brain drain" reports which were much publicised by government ministers in the late 1960s. The Autoland, FMS, and other sophisticated parts showed a number of examples from this background.
Hopefully all found the weather in Burbank (where the Tristar was designed, although assembled in Palmdale) a bit better than Hatfield.
A lot of the Tristar (eg the S-duct) came from the Hawker Siddeley Trident, whose development ran down as the Tristar was building up. The senior engineers who moved across the Atlantic were a key part of the "brain drain" reports which were much publicised by government ministers in the late 1960s. The Autoland, FMS, and other sophisticated parts showed a number of examples from this background.
Hopefully all found the weather in Burbank (where the Tristar was designed, although assembled in Palmdale) a bit better than Hatfield.
And don't even get me started on the DH146 that the ass's subsequently named an Avro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: NI
Posts: 1,033
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One other advantage of the DC-10's centre-engine mounting was that it was quite simple to develop a CFRP fin to replace the alloy unit. They had that flying in the early 1980s, it plugged into the banjo spars.
I don't think it entered service, though it was ahead of the A300's composite fin, but they did transition to making the rudder from CFRP.
I don't think it entered service, though it was ahead of the A300's composite fin, but they did transition to making the rudder from CFRP.
One bad feature of the L-1011 was its dependence on electrics for functions. I ran from JFK to LGA when one of our aircraft was unable to shut down its engine. I found Nbr. 2 engine running at sub-idle, the others were shutdown. The APU would not start. I found the battery totally depleted.The HP cock (electrically operated) was partially closed which is why it was running at sub-idle. As the engine had slowed the IDG went off line. With no power the valve stopped moving. Pulling the emergency firewall shutoff handle elicited a series of clicks from the switches but with no power, no action. The aircraft would not accept ground power with a dead battery. I got LGA Maintenance to get a spare battery. When plugged in, the HP Cock completed it cycle. After troubleshooting, I found a battery transfer relay had failed, so keeping the battery on line but the charger off.
A couple of years later when I was Manager at EWR we had a fire in the E and E compartment of a L-1011 that broke out as it taxied in. It started from a heater on the toilet tank dump valve, spread through the shroud on the tank, the air ducting and was going aft burning the insulation when a potable water line running across the compartment cooked, burst and subdued the fire. Fortunately, the aircraft had docked and the L1 pax door opened and loading bridge on. The electrical power then failed. The crew was not aware of the fire as the overboard vent fan from the E&E was blowing smoke and bits of burnt plastic outside. A stampede of pax and crew ensued as the fumes then came up. The fumes were bad enough to send one of my supervisors off to the hospital when he entered the plane looking for the fire source.
We were lucky. The loss of electrics occurred after engine shutdown and with the L1 door open. Had it occurred on taxi-in or even worse, in-flight, it would not have been possible to shut the engines down nor turn off the bleed air to the packs. The L-1011 had no manual operation of the outflow valve as the DC-8, DC-9 and DC-10 had. Even a slight amount of cabin pressure would have prevented the L-1011 inward-opening doors from opening. We narrowly avoided what happened later in Saudi Arabia. There is much to be said for a few cable-operated valves.
A couple of years later when I was Manager at EWR we had a fire in the E and E compartment of a L-1011 that broke out as it taxied in. It started from a heater on the toilet tank dump valve, spread through the shroud on the tank, the air ducting and was going aft burning the insulation when a potable water line running across the compartment cooked, burst and subdued the fire. Fortunately, the aircraft had docked and the L1 pax door opened and loading bridge on. The electrical power then failed. The crew was not aware of the fire as the overboard vent fan from the E&E was blowing smoke and bits of burnt plastic outside. A stampede of pax and crew ensued as the fumes then came up. The fumes were bad enough to send one of my supervisors off to the hospital when he entered the plane looking for the fire source.
We were lucky. The loss of electrics occurred after engine shutdown and with the L1 door open. Had it occurred on taxi-in or even worse, in-flight, it would not have been possible to shut the engines down nor turn off the bleed air to the packs. The L-1011 had no manual operation of the outflow valve as the DC-8, DC-9 and DC-10 had. Even a slight amount of cabin pressure would have prevented the L-1011 inward-opening doors from opening. We narrowly avoided what happened later in Saudi Arabia. There is much to be said for a few cable-operated valves.
Last edited by tonytales; 18th Dec 2017 at 06:40. Reason: spelling corection
Maybe I'm imagining things after all these years.
Afraid not. No vents in the doors. The emergency handle by each door just pulled the lock pin from one of the racks that carried the door up and simultaneously released the brake which actually was what held the door closed.
Isn't a means to open the doors with residual pressure a cerification requirement? That would mean the provision of a vent door which mechanically opens with the opening handle, if I remember correctly.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not recall any vents but they were included on the 767 and I was told that the inclusion was due to issues with the L1011 electric doors.
An aside I can recall often 2 BA L1011 rendezvoused at Khartoum in transit (with pax on board) and it was practise to open the doors on the shaded side. No warning barriers or door cable. It used to make me feel stressed as pax and children stood in the open doorway leaning out!
An aside I can recall often 2 BA L1011 rendezvoused at Khartoum in transit (with pax on board) and it was practise to open the doors on the shaded side. No warning barriers or door cable. It used to make me feel stressed as pax and children stood in the open doorway leaning out!