Originally Posted by
Sled
Of course we can do this, but if the goal is to somehow explain away the MD11s poor safety record and say that they're all isolated incidents that aren't really representative, then we should do the same for the other airplanes. The statistic in question is hull losses per departure, so only the hull losses which occurred after setting takeoff power would be counted. Consider the 777...if we play the same game there we note that the triple has had a total of eight hull losses, but only 5 of these occurred after setting takeoff power, and these would be the ones counted in this statistic:
1) British Airways 38 - fuel starvation due to ice in the fuel system
2) Asiana Airlines 214 - crash on final due to unstable approach
3) Malaysia 370 - unknown...lots of speculation, most likely theory that fits the evidence is that one of the pilots deliberately crashed to commit suicide
4) Malaysia 17 - SA-17
5) Emirates 521 - Crew didn't add power during a rejected landing
(For the sake of completeness here are the other three are EgyptAir 667, Singapore Nov2017, and Ethiopian Jul2020. These all occurred during ground handling.)
So considering the 5 777 hull losses which occurred in flight, we have at least one (Malaysia 17) and possibly two (if you include Malaysia 370) which is/are not in any way due to a problem with the aircraft. Of the remaining three, two were crew induced so that we really only have one (BA38) where the causal factor was a design/engineering issue.
The upshot is that over millions of departures the statistical anomalies should wash out, so that by considering the whole body of work we can get a picture of how safe or unsafe an aircraft is...and the result is that the MD11 is profoundly unsafe...which is precisely why it is no longer operated by any passenger carrier. Consider that the last MD11 was built in October 2000 making it just over 25 years old, while DAL, UAL, and AA all operate aircraft that are the same age or older (apparently DAL has a 757 which is 35 years old).
I agree with everything you have to say except 1 thing. The 777 is a much better aircraft. It also was a clean sheet design not based of something designed in the 1960s. I’m not trying to rationalize the safety record. I’m just trying to present some evidence on when people say they won’t get on one again. And trust me, I have that exact emotional reaction after this most recent accident. So I completely understand. I just wanted to point out some specifics.
The only thing I disagree with you on is that it was retired from pax use due to safety. It was retired due to its fuel consumption, lack of range, excessive MX costs, and suitable competitor aircraft that performed better (777 and A330). Multiple major Us and EU airlines operated the type for over 10 years in the US and 20 years in Europe without any “major” incidents. The MD11 was built 10 years too late and is a design of the past. While the 777 in some cases can be considered the best widebody aircraft ever built.