What's Wrong With the MD-11?

[Matt Molnar]

Popular Mechanics:

What's Wrong With the MD-11?
Some pilots say that the MD-11 invites disaster. Does it?



A FedEx McDonnell Douglas freighter, landing through gusty winds at Tokyo's Narita International Airport on March 23, 2009, bounces during touchdown. As the airplane impacts the runway a second time, it banks sharply, snapping the port wing on the ground and rupturing a fuel tank. In flames, the MD-11 rolls over onto its back, then slides out of view of the airport surveillance camera filming the tragedy. Both pilots are killed. The accident, still under investigation, appears to be a carbon copy of two previous MD-11 crashes--a FedEx freighter at Newark International Airport, N.J., in 1997 and a China Airlines passenger jet at Hong Kong International Airport in 1999. "I've never heard of a landing flip-over with any other type of airliner," says John DeLisi, deputy director of aviation safety at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). [Full Article]

[N221UA]

There is a rumor that MD-11 is more sensitive to crosswind landings because of its airframe design and aerodynamics, also the MD-11 has a higher approach speed compared to other commercial airliners and therefore can be quite tricky to land during high wind conditions.

[USAF Pilot 07]

It's got a smaller tail section compared to the DC-10 and can be more unstable at approach speeds, especially if heavy. Overall though it's still a safe airliner, operating thousands of flight daily around the world.

[DHG750R]

You can see the effect of the smaller horizontal stab and the lengthened fuselage in these pictures. Notice what appears to be a rather odd angle of the stab compared to the DC-10 in the last picture. I was reading a very good website on the MD11 and found a very rare picture of a Continental DC-10-10 fitted with winglets.
http://md-eleven.net/MD11-History-Developement

[Delta777LR]

From what I can say about the MD-11, the aircraft is a nice looking bird but the performance was pretty poor, the tailplane and the stab was also an issue, because of theses issues the MD-11 had, many PAX airlines gave them up as early as 1998/99, but it became very good with many freight operaters, even though a few freight airlines like FE, KE had a few small incident with cargo load on the plane which made them lean back onto the ground..

[USAF Pilot 07]

From what I can say about the MD-11, the aircraft is a nice looking bird but the performance was pretty poor, the tailplane and the stab was also an issue, because of theses issues the MD-11 had, many PAX airlines gave them up as early as 1998/99, but it became very good with many freight operaters, even though a few freight airlines like FE, KE had a few small incident with cargo load on the plane which made them lean back onto the ground..

all in one sentence!

[Derf]

A friend of mine is a MD-11 pilot and he tells me there is no sweet spot for the aircraft to settle in on approach as you have to fly it all the way down to the runway. The nose wanted to rise sometimes and drop other times and the same pilot would fly the 727, 737 and now the 777. Of course this is second hand so it is 100% parlor talk. :borat:

[NLovis]

Yea my father has said how the shortened stabilizer has made the plane dangerous. I have yet to see the difference but I have also yet to get up close to a MD-11. Which i'm still trying to do. Some help would be appreciated. Also dont have a good shot of a MD-11. So yea. The way I have heard of all of this the MD-11 doesnt have much of a life left.

[Tom_Turner]

I can follow in theory the issue of the smaller horizontal stab and the lengthened fuselage, but not what it is I am supposed to be noticing in those images... the DC-10 and the MD-11s are taken from different angles.. different airports, different dates and presumably different wind conditions..

Is there anything odd about the MD-11 smaller stabilizer in these images, which are more what we see in the DC-10 example:

You can see the effect of the smaller horizontal stab and the lengthened fuselage in these pictures. Notice what appears to be a rather odd angle of the stab compared to the DC-10 in the last picture. I was reading a very good website on the MD11 and found a very rare picture of a Continental DC-10-10 fitted with winglets.
http://md-eleven.net/MD11-History-Developement

[Derf]

[Tom_Turner]

Thanks Fred - I realize it is a different tail DC-10 to MD-11, but do those images show where "You can see the effect" of it??

Its a rhetorical question at this point though, never mind..

Tom

[Derf]

Thanks Fred - I realize it is a different tail DC-10 to MD-11, but do those images show where "You can see the effect" of it??

Its a rhetorical question at this point though, never mind..

Tom

I was not responding to your post rather than just showing two line art drawing of the aircraft. -Fred

[Tom_Turner]

I was not responding to your post rather than just showing two line art drawing of the aircraft. -Fred

k -- It is a useful comparison :D thx, TT

[FlyingColors]

To summarize the MD-11 arguments:

1-It's smaller horizontal stab has been a source of controversy since its inception.
2-Every aircraft has its own unique handling operating characteristics, with some strong and weak areas. No type will provide across the board utopia.
3- Fact: many MD-11s/DC-10s were yanked out of service prematurely due to downturn in economy, 9/11, and the resulting glut of 777s offered at ultra attractive rates. Not from dangerous operations or failures.
4- If the MD-11 is a looser or dangerous then FedEx, UPS, KLM, Finnair and a few others would have not used them for so long- with so little trouble. Yes there have been just a few wrecks, BUT this type has been in service for 22 years, and counting. Were talking about a large amout of people and cargo safely transported worldwide- even to this day.

The MD-11 is a victim of circumstance.
It's initial range performance was off. Everyone in aviation business remembers that. MD came out with a fix and it actually exceeded the original design expectations. Not remembered well at all.
The few losses they had, as they always are for any crash, a complex compilation of weather, operation conditions/mechanical and pilot error.

Stating "whats wrong with the MD-11" to me spells unbridled fanaticism from a panic inducing reporter who's only goal is to sell stories, regardless of fact, to the simple minded public that will buy anything drenched in negativity and hopefully slingshot their carrier to anchor.

In conclusion its unfair and unscientific to condem the MD-11. Its a solid and profitable aircraft. I assure you every time one takes off a lucky rabbits foot is not required for safe operation and when they touch down the operators are not counting how much debt they have acquired. They work, they fly, safe, and still turning a profit.

[NLovis]

To summarize the MD-11 arguments:

1-It's smaller horizontal stab has been a source of controversy since its inception.
2-Every aircraft has its own unique handling operating characteristics, with some strong and weak areas. No type will provide across the board utopia.
3- Fact: many MD-11s/DC-10s were yanked out of service prematurely due to downturn in economy, 9/11, and the resulting glut of 777s offered at ultra attractive rates. Not from dangerous operations or failures.
4- If the MD-11 is a looser or dangerous then FedEx, UPS, KLM, Finnair and a few others would have not used them for so long- with so little trouble. Yes there have been just a few wrecks, BUT this type has been in service for 22 years, and counting. Were talking about a large amout of people and cargo safely transported worldwide- even to this day.

The MD-11 is a victim of circumstance.
It's initial range performance was off. Everyone in aviation business remembers that. MD came out with a fix and it actually exceeded the original design expectations. Not remembered well at all.
The few losses they had, as they always are for any crash, a complex compilation of weather, operation conditions/mechanical and pilot error.

Stating "whats wrong with the MD-11" to me spells unbridled fanaticism from a panic inducing reporter who's only goal is to sell stories, regardless of fact, to the simple minded public that will buy anything drenched in negativity and hopefully slingshot their carrier to anchor.

In conclusion its unfair and unscientific to condem the MD-11. Its a solid and profitable aircraft. I assure you every time one takes off a lucky rabbits foot is not required for safe operation and when they touch down the operators are not counting how much debt they have acquired. They work, they fly, safe, and still turning a profit.

Remember as a/c age they break more frequently. And as that happens the safety of the a/c goes into question. Ok 22 years in service and counting. And safety is already being queationed. Truth be told how much longer does the MD-11 have left? The findings from this crash will either be the key to longer life or the nail in the coffin for most MD-11 still flying. And lets not forget the more recent MD-11 crash out of state. I read an article about it and how it was simmilar to the fed ex crash. (diff carriers though) Truth be told and you all know this, the outlook for the MD-11 is grim.