Originally Posted by
Sled
But I claim that the need for such thorough training is a symptom of design flaws of the aircraft. What is the alternative? That FedEx just likes to give extra training on the MD for fun? No...they needed to enhance that training to compensate for the safety record of the aircraft, because they either couldn't get it insured or they had civil aviation authorities threatening to ban the aircraft if there was another incident (my speculation only...if you have a better explanation for why FDX would give such extensive landing training I'm happy to hear it).
Just because it doesn’t fly like every other airplane you’ve flown doesn’t mean it’s a flaw. Is a tailwheel a design flaw? You have to fly a tail dragger differently or it will bite you as well. FDX’s landing performance team has done a great job recognizing its differences and training people to operate it safely. A lot of these recommendations have made other fleets safer as well. The MU2 used to be barely insurable, then the SFAR came out requiring specific training for it. Now it has a better safety records than most other turboprops. The 11 might be a bit more demanding to fly, but in well trained and capable hands it’s a solid airplane.