But the reverser does deploy, you're correct that the interlock prevent reverse thrust until the squat switchon the NLG is activated. Reverser #2 depoyment + Flightidle induces already an ANU pitch.

We used to fly empty MD-11s out of UIO to GYE and everytime when a co-pilot under training was doing the landing, the IP has to interfere as soon as the Groundspoilers were deployed.

Concerning the CLG brakes; McD (now Boeig BTW) incorporated a reducer in the hydraulic supply lines to brakes #9 & #10 so the brakeaction of these brakes are reduced to 50% of the regular brakes. They did this for a reason.
Although MED autobrake can be selected depending on runway length and a/c weight, it's better to rollout as long as possible to enlarge CLG hardware.

That's interesting. Boeing is now telling us to use (for the 767-300)auto brake two at a minimum, even at low wights and with a long run out. They say that the heavier braking will not increase brake wear. I'll have to read the supp again, but I remember it saying that with the carbon brakes this is the way they want it done.

Still going in to Subic eh. I used to fly a CV580 in there from Cebu, and remember it being rather nasty at night, with a gusty tail wind, and of course the driving rain. Must be even more fun in a DC-10 or MD-11.

This CLG resonance problem only occured at CLG hardware on the MD-11.
The CLG wheel tendend to loose the brake actions earlier an more often due to autobraking, resulting in a violent resonance throughout the airplane. Due to extreme fatique some CLGs failed in operation.

As weights are far more bigger on the Main mounts, these MLG doesn't have this problem. The brake actions of the carbon brakes fitted on nowadays aircraft are more efficient then the metal brakes which are used on the DC-10.

Not sure where you get your information, but it is mostly wrong. You are taking small bits of factual information and extrapolating from it incorrectly.

Carbon brakes wear less with autobrakes on, and the record has not indicated that there are particular problems with the CLG, as the incident history will show you. It is true the brakes were modified on the CLG, but that's where your facts end. There was never anything violent about it, and the number of failures that could possibly be attributed to the issues you describe were too small to be statistically significant. In any event, it is a non-issue now with the current brake metering.

Also, the last FCC load is 908, the FMC loads are the numbers that have been posted in earlier messages, currently up to 921.

As to your landing technique issues, never encountered those, I agree with Foxhunter.

Information that I get is from the Boeing service experience digest which is distributed among the MD-11 operators.
Furthermore my statements are based on my experience as qualified Engineer on the MD-11 since 1990 as AMT and being qualified as Flight Test Engineer trained at the Swissair Flight Academy in ZRH.

Did my WU today and my instructor showed us pictures of the tailstike on the MD in SFS. Not pretty to say the least, its bad...real bad. They are trying to get it repaired to ferry to Singapore and not sure if that is even possible.

Time to wake up and take a good look in the mirror.

Does anyone know the status of the MD-10 hull from the MEM accident?

Rebuilable or hull loss?

I think its still under tents at the maint hangar near Wilson Air!

Actually, the aircraft under the tent is he airplane that had the engine engine falll into a farmers field in Arkansas throwing engine peices through the wing.

The White "elephant" on the east side of the hanger is the MD-10 "gear colapse". Hope this helps ...

Doh, yep, that makes sense!