GULF AIR foresees TRISTARS,the only way out
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK I humbly repent for professing a liking for new shiny planes instead of old ugly ducklings - what do I know I am just pax! There may be some validity to the theory that old designs were overbuilt - similar to building construction in most of the modern world today - old buildings were overdesigned because engineers wanted some margin of error and their calculations and modelling were primitive so assumptions were always weighted towards more not less. Current state of the art in building construction is to engineer them to the very edge to save money with more possibility of failure. That being said I have flown on Delta's Tristars before they parked them and they were TIRED and that was some time ago.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Zealand
Age: 73
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to understand the concept of the era here. The L1011 was overbuilt - for all the reasons above, and as such she does not perform so well (in fuel / range terms) as the modern metal. However the Tristar is beautifully built. The Lockheed stable that designed her was at the time working on the Space Shuttle and that research comes through loud and clear in the aerodynamics and structure.
She is rather heavy on "old world" technology and can be a sod to maintain if you don't know the systems. But after all the initial problems with the RB211's things settled down to a very solid airliner. Indeed it may well be, when all the bets are in, that the L1011 will prove to be the safest of all the types so far (at time of writing).
That many are shabby now is a function of TLC - not the design or the airframe. Properly cared for and restored (if you will) she could serve for many many more years yet. The 3 engine concept is a perfect compromise. Remember they only put 8 engines on when 6 wouldn''t produce the urge.
Putting a third motor in the tail is the only logical solution (for 3) and only Lockheed got it correct with the "S" duct. The DC10 was an abomination. However there are structural penalties and she pays them. But at current purchase prices there is a lot of slack for a refit and lots of TLC that would make a wonderful mid range airliner.
It will take courage and foresight to put these babies back into mainstream service. But with oil at $15 a barrel and holding and giveaway prices - it would not be a real gamble. Certainly I would rather take a ride on a Tristar than a A330/340. And when the going gets rough - I would not be clutching the seat arms worrying about the fin - I would be shouting - "Go baby - Go !"
But then I am biased. I have 3000+ hours in those wide seats at the front with the big windows and never had more than a minor heartburn from her. Faster than a 744, stronger than a C130, prettier than a dolphin - what more could you ask?
She is rather heavy on "old world" technology and can be a sod to maintain if you don't know the systems. But after all the initial problems with the RB211's things settled down to a very solid airliner. Indeed it may well be, when all the bets are in, that the L1011 will prove to be the safest of all the types so far (at time of writing).
That many are shabby now is a function of TLC - not the design or the airframe. Properly cared for and restored (if you will) she could serve for many many more years yet. The 3 engine concept is a perfect compromise. Remember they only put 8 engines on when 6 wouldn''t produce the urge.
Putting a third motor in the tail is the only logical solution (for 3) and only Lockheed got it correct with the "S" duct. The DC10 was an abomination. However there are structural penalties and she pays them. But at current purchase prices there is a lot of slack for a refit and lots of TLC that would make a wonderful mid range airliner.
It will take courage and foresight to put these babies back into mainstream service. But with oil at $15 a barrel and holding and giveaway prices - it would not be a real gamble. Certainly I would rather take a ride on a Tristar than a A330/340. And when the going gets rough - I would not be clutching the seat arms worrying about the fin - I would be shouting - "Go baby - Go !"
But then I am biased. I have 3000+ hours in those wide seats at the front with the big windows and never had more than a minor heartburn from her. Faster than a 744, stronger than a C130, prettier than a dolphin - what more could you ask?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guvnor, sorry old chum but you are living in a dreamworld.
How many L1011 operators are out there? Exclude the -500 operators for a while and you are basically left with;
1. Air Transat
2. TradeWinds
3. ATA
4. Air Atlanta
5. That clown in Thailand
6. Er...
7. ...that's it!
Of those Transat are grounding their entire fleet of non-500 L1011s post Sep 11. TradeWinds are contemplating their navel, Altlanta are grounding and the clown is being grounded.
Question - if the L1011 is on the dawn of a second coming as you suggest how come all the operators in the world can be counted on one hand? How come these operators are reducing? How come the existing operators are not rushing to acquire these bargains you wax lyrical about? How come the cash-strapped airlines in the smellier parts of the world aren't rushing to buy them either?
Multiple choice time.
Could it be that either
A. The aircraft are cheap to reactivate and operate; or
B. You're talking out of the back of your head?
Answers on a post card please!
How many L1011 operators are out there? Exclude the -500 operators for a while and you are basically left with;
1. Air Transat
2. TradeWinds
3. ATA
4. Air Atlanta
5. That clown in Thailand
6. Er...
7. ...that's it!
Of those Transat are grounding their entire fleet of non-500 L1011s post Sep 11. TradeWinds are contemplating their navel, Altlanta are grounding and the clown is being grounded.
Question - if the L1011 is on the dawn of a second coming as you suggest how come all the operators in the world can be counted on one hand? How come these operators are reducing? How come the existing operators are not rushing to acquire these bargains you wax lyrical about? How come the cash-strapped airlines in the smellier parts of the world aren't rushing to buy them either?
Multiple choice time.
Could it be that either
A. The aircraft are cheap to reactivate and operate; or
B. You're talking out of the back of your head?
Answers on a post card please!
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just thought I would throw this into the mix. What with the Hadjj fast aproaching and not so many aircraft available to troop the pilgrims, might it not be a good time for say Saudia to put a few back in the air.
"grins knowingly to himself and stands back"
"grins knowingly to himself and stands back"
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even SV does not have enough cash to reactivate their TriStars', when they were parked, many had multiple deferred items and are ALL in need of a 'D' check. There were/are only about six that are economical to repair and fly again...and even then those six are not able to use oceanic airspace without a major avionics upgrade....OK for Africa or South America tho... even the USA.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Level 1 or better--
Lockheed has told everyone concerned that they will NOT support any L10 that is fitted with an inboard (or outboard) rear spar kit that was previously sold to an operator and not used....as in the two kits that were recently sold at the Kittyhawk auction. Of course, if LM support is not ah...desired, then well, rather out on a limb.
Lockheed has told everyone concerned that they will NOT support any L10 that is fitted with an inboard (or outboard) rear spar kit that was previously sold to an operator and not used....as in the two kits that were recently sold at the Kittyhawk auction. Of course, if LM support is not ah...desired, then well, rather out on a limb.
Guest
Posts: n/a
411A - what happens then in a situation where one buys an ex KHI aircraft and an ex KHI spar kit? Would that conform - or not - with LMSC's rather interesting requirement?
Not quite sure how they could justify this, unless each kit is tailor made for the client and will only fit a specific aircraft. There should only be two variants as I understand it - one for the longbodies and one for the -500s.
But then I have to admit that the concept of 'customer service' appears to be lacking from the many manuals at Greenville!
Not quite sure how they could justify this, unless each kit is tailor made for the client and will only fit a specific aircraft. There should only be two variants as I understand it - one for the longbodies and one for the -500s.
But then I have to admit that the concept of 'customer service' appears to be lacking from the many manuals at Greenville!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ugh, well there flame out, its called HAVING YOUR THAI CERTIFICATE CANCELLED (as in Kaput, goodby)....anything else you would like to know?
And for those who would like to know about Lockheed, why not call them directly for the information. I have the number handy...for those that are really interested.
And for those who would like to know about Lockheed, why not call them directly for the information. I have the number handy...for those that are really interested.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gov, Lockheed is concerned that the kits have been tampered with, and all of their parts are not there (fasteners are critical). If I were Lockheed, I would be concerned too....for quality control purposes...and the FAA agrees, strangely enough.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411A
- and there has never been an incorrectly supplied part from Lockheed !!
It would depend on where and how the kit has been stored; if there is any record of parts taken from the kit and to which revision of the SB the kit was supplied to.
This could apply to any SB kit supplied by any manufacturer.
Just how would the FAA enforce this ?
- and there has never been an incorrectly supplied part from Lockheed !!
It would depend on where and how the kit has been stored; if there is any record of parts taken from the kit and to which revision of the SB the kit was supplied to.
This could apply to any SB kit supplied by any manufacturer.
Just how would the FAA enforce this ?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Level 1 or better---
I'ts all called liability, and that is what Lockheed is worried about. Of course, if an operator does not need or want Lockheed support, then they can purchase and install the kit, no problem. For the FAA concerns, contact the ATL ACO.
I'ts all called liability, and that is what Lockheed is worried about. Of course, if an operator does not need or want Lockheed support, then they can purchase and install the kit, no problem. For the FAA concerns, contact the ATL ACO.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Guvnor and 411A!
Have a question for you - Guvnor mentioned that you both would be interested to see a new L1011 Operator or at least some back in the air!
We are currently working on a project to preserve one. Any intrest there or ideas for support?
Drop me a line if interested!
Have a question for you - Guvnor mentioned that you both would be interested to see a new L1011 Operator or at least some back in the air!
We are currently working on a project to preserve one. Any intrest there or ideas for support?
Drop me a line if interested!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Gee, 411A, you're so predictable. Didn't we go through this a couple of months ago? Dude, get a life! What do you have against that outfit anyway? They didn't give you a job or what? I know there's really not a lot to do out in Arizona but c'mon. At least The Guvnor doesn't try to bag everybody at every corner. But you...
You sound like the kind of guy who sits in the bar with a really big watch.
You sound like the kind of guy who sits in the bar with a really big watch.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Gods Country
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now this really IS a proper rumour thread. One completely unsubstantiated rumour about Gulf air and some beaten up old dogs of aircraft that nobody in his right mind would ever fly again without unrestricted access to the maintenance data, and all the cockroaches come creeping out of the cracks...The Guvnor, Fergineer, 411a.....plus all the RAF civvy wannabees desperate to see the last of Ascension and Port Stanley....bravo that man! 
