Talk:McDonnell Douglas MD-11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Aviation Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.


Since MD doesnt exist anymore anyway, could someone please disclose what the performance shortfalls were? It seems quite of interest currently because the new airbus 380 is rumoured to have similar problems facing it......

  • MD is still around as part of Boeing. The article says the MD-11 didn't meet targets for range and fuel burn. There needs to be a reference for that statement though.. -Fnlayson 17:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Tanker section

Tanker Program is NOT NPOV: The language and tone of this section is definately not NPOV. --Tarpy 14:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Yep. It is a lot of speculation at the least. -Fnlayson 15:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

MDC Boeing did provide retrofit kits which addressed some of the problems by reducing drag, especially around the engine pylons for the wingmounts. But by then the commercial damage was done. Overall the MD-11 was more suited to higher weight and shorter range operations as flown by freight carriers. The range and fuel burn problems were a direct result of using the DC-10 wing layout to save money at MDC. Later freight buyers such as Lufthansa Cargo would have added more newbuilds if the line was still going as it makes an excellent hauler for them. That's another pointer towards the KC-11 being a strong contender against the big twins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.152.42.212 (talk • contribs)

Well, a KC-11 would be a fine tanker no doubt, but one in the "extra large" category, even larger that KC-10. Not a successor for the mid-sized KC-135.

Ok, I do agree with Boeing pushing its 767 against the MD-11. It is not a point of view nor an opinion that Boeing has not been a fan of the MD-11 but a fact. One major reason (out of many others) for Boeing's purchase of MDC was to shut down the MD-11 in order to sell more 777s. The MD-11 was not a huge threat, however Boeing did it anyway. Also, on many occasions the 767 has been heavily pushed for the tanker program. One executive was fired for taking bribes for this. The list goes on and on. Lufthansa and Fedex wanted more freighters late 1999, yet Boeing insisted on closing the production line. The Md-11 and DC-10 were the flagship of MDC and caused great pains at Boeing for over 3 decades. Getting rid of it was a combination of all these factors. Therefore I think the claims presented in the paragraph are sound and the tag needs to be removed, however I also think the paragraph should be worded differently to not sound so speculative. --Bangabalunga 05:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


With the way it is worded now I'm inclined to want to remove the Neutrality tag. It could use a cite or two would help. Anybody want the NPOV tag to stay? -Fnlayson

[edit] Infobox image

An editer has been capitalizing the infobox file name for some reason. But the image isn't showing up with the capital N.

Here are examples:

File name: air namibia.jpg
File name: air namibia.jpg
Image:Air Namibia.jpg
File name: air Namibia.jpg

[edit] Last passenger MD-11

Am I right with this plane ? [1] 217.86.33.170 21:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is the last passenger MD-11 built. --EuroSprinter 11:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Combi MTOW

An editer added this to the article but messed up the references section in the process.

MD11 COMBI max take off weight was 283.700 kg, not 285.990 as stated. Only five were built and they were all operated by alitalia. All 5 aircraft have since been converted to CARGO and renamed MD11SF (special freighter) due to the unique position of the main cargo door in the rear of the aircraft. Eventually the max take off weight of the MD11SF has been increased to 285.990 kg

What's the source for values? -Fnlayson 14:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Combi Passengers

The MD-11C could have been transformed into an all passenger aircraft with the same capacity as the MD-11 in a single class layout. --EuroSprinter 22:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Oh, it was understanding that the cargo space was fixed in the Combi. The Airliners.net page lists lower 2 class and 3 class capacity for the Combi. Well the numbers should match the passenger version then. Sorry.. -Fnlayson 22:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Probably that Alitalia never used them otherwise than in Combi configuration, but if you check Kev's MD-11 site, you can see an official document from the manufacturer that shows all the different combinations. Although it doesn't show a high density, I don't think it was impossible. http://md-eleven.net/Specs-Technical-Details --EuroSprinter 22:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I changed it back. The Boeing Combi page says it can be all passenger with no pallets. -Fnlayson 22:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Origins addition

  • Nice addition on the background info, EuroSprinter. Did that happen to come from McDonnell Douglas MD-11: A Long Beach Swansong or McDonnell Douglas MD-11 (Mordern Civil Aircraft: 12)? Those references are already listed and would be easy to add to the new info. Thanks. -Fnlayson 16:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. About 95% came from the 'Modern Civil Aircraft: 12' book, and the rest is split between the 'Swansong' and a magazine report I'll add as references. --EuroSprinter 19:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Good deal. I moved the MD-11 Civil reference up there so you can use. -Fnlayson 19:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Variants

Could it be worthwhile to add a new "Variants" section after "Design" that would incorporate the last paragraph of the later ? Somehow like for the DC-10 article but in a smaller way ? --EuroSprinter 20:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

  • That'd be fine. It would probably encourage expansion too. More details on the Combi and Convertable Freighter would be good. I'd mention the ER at the top, since it is an option they all could have. -Fnlayson 22:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I may make some changes to what you've started when I'll work on it in a few hours after the night. But anything could be discused and changed back of course. My ideas are not "of course" the best. --EuroSprinter 00:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Do what you can. I'm sure it'll be an improvment. -Fnlayson 03:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Varig still flies this plane

Why is Varig still listed as having retired the type? On Airliners.net, there was a picture of a Varig MD-11 in service that was taken just 2 weeks ago, and even the Varig page on Wikipedia says they are still in service. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.105.10.127 (talk) 02:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Well, I'm a bit hesitant about it. I've listed VRG Linhas Aereasas current operator, while Varig is on the previous operator list based on what www.ch-aviation.ch says. Still, the situation isn't pretty clear for me, but the article on Wiki talk of a "new" Varig (VRG Linhas Aereas). Any clarification on that airline would be much appreciated. --EuroSprinter 20:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

  • I just checked one of my source on the web, and it says that three MD-11s were transfered from VARIG to VRG Linhas Aereas in July 2006. All three still had the Varig colors. The fleet is now down to two. --EuroSprinter 21:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Someone has anynomously removed the VRG Linhas Aereas as current operator, and has changed the status of the aircraft on the airline article without providing a source. Clarification is needed.--EuroSprinter 19:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Change it back and add your reference(s). Question: Are you saying above that Varig still has 2 MD-11s and VRG Linhas Aereas has 3 now? Thanks. -Fnlayson 01:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your question, the old Varig is no more. Thus, the new one, VRG Linhas Aereas, owned by Gol Transportes Aereos and still showing the VARIG name on its aircraft, has two MD-11s that were transferred from the old airline into the new. At first, three MD-11s (PP-VTI/J/P) were used, but since January the fleet is down to two, and perhaps zero now if they stopped operating them. Time will tell. --EuroSprinter 13:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Ah, much clearer. Thanks a lot for explaining. -Fnlayson 17:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Varig is now using only one MD-11 that should remain in service until the beginning of June. I think this will appear in the upcoming sources update. So I don't change them on the article. I still wonder if I'll have to merge all MD-11s into a single past operator or not ? --EuroSprinter 23:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Finally, I think that I'll merge both VRG Lihas Aereas and Varig under the name Varig. I can't get enough proof to do it otherwise. As Varig is expected to operate for the last time an MD-11 during this coming week-end, I'll wait and update the former ops part afterwards. --EuroSprinter 10:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Operators section

I've modified that section to make it more detailed, and hopefully clearer, allowing one operator to appear as current but also to show its former status if possible. --EuroSprinter 09:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)