Airline Pilot Central Forums - UPS MD-11 tailstrike

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Safety (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/)

- - UPS MD-11 tailstrike (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/safety/70581-ups-md-11-tailstrike.html)

The way it was explained to me was, MD basically put a longer, heavier fueselage on the same DC10 wing, with winglets, but they upped the MGTOW by about 100,000 and added that pogo stick center main gear.

I know we had to advise ATC we would be flying 265 (ias) below 10,000' as that was clean speed when we departed ATL for NRT fully loaded, with the aux fuel tanks. Then we could only climb up to FL280 for the first 4-5 hours, until we had burned off enough fuel to get higher.

Oh, and they said the reason for that whole LSAS system was, the horizontal stab. was too small but MD didn't want to put a bigger one on it, (more drag, more wt.), so they just tweaked the one they had.

You may recall that when AA first got them, and they were burning a lot more fuel than advertised, they sued MD and won some money to pay back for the extra fuel burn. The rumor at DL was, if you bought an MD11, you got two MD88's for Free!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1279860)

Actually it is similar to the DC-9 morph into MD-88.

The MD-11 did increase the fuselage length
It has a different Wing that has much less drag
The Center Gear was also on the DC-10-30 No Change.
The MD-11 added a Tail Fuel Tank (and auto Tail fuel management) which gave an aft CG for better fuel economy. It actually worked very well and was required for extra long leg segments.
The Fuel economy was fine, it just didn't quite have the Advertised Range when it was fully loaded. MEM (or ATL)-NRT in the winter time was about it's limit.
The horizontal Stab on the MD-11 was different than the DC-10's. It was smaller and slotted and very pitch sensitive because it was further back from the CG than the older DC-10.
They added LSAS , which worked well. You just had to get use to it when hand flying.

It did have the highest approach speed of any Transport category aircraft that I know of.
The safety flight envelope on the MD11 might be a little smaller than say a 777 or 747, but it is still a safe aircraft if operated properly. BTW many fully grossed Heavy aircraft probably have to exceed 250 "clean" on departure.

It may not be a 777 but The MD-11 is a fine aircraft. It has it's quirks like any aircraft.
You can easily Tail strike any Heavy Aircraft if you aren't stable.

RickAir77

You wrote: "Or google "Davis Island C-17"

Talk about good brakes!!!! I'm privy to info about this incident and the C-17 brakes should win an award for stopping power, probably 99% of aircraft in the same situation would be in the Bay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedeyeAV8r (Post 1279871)

Like I said back at the beginning of this thread, I flew it for 4 years and never had a problem with it, but I know lots of guys who did. You had to watch the CG, and fly it like milking a mouse. I never had a bad landing in it, but I knew lots of guys who did...most were instructors and LCA's landing it with an aft CG.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1280164)

Hard to believe a guy who says he never had a bad landing in a airplane he flew for 4 years. :D Seriously once flew with a Captain who said the same about a empty Airbus 310. He then proceeded to punish the runway for the next week, made me wonder what he thought a bad landing was.:eek:

Well as F/O on a 3 or 4 pilot crew, we didn't get but one landing a month...if we were lucky! So, I had to make each one count.

I had a really good instructor when I checked out on it (the 'milking the mouse' guy). He flew the KC10 and the DC 10, as well as the MD911, so he passed on quite a bit of his 'tricks' to keep you out of trouble. "Maintain your pitch, and don't get slow!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Need4Speed (Post 1277482)

The report shows that it happened during an autoland. It will be interesting to see what the data recorders show on this one.

MX guys are saying it happened on take-off.

A tail strike on takeoff took out an MD-11 in PVG not too long ago. If it did indeed happen on takeoff those guys are lucky to be alive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vito (Post 1278315)

Adlerdriver,
Its an aircraft carrier approach, utilizing AOA, landing in the "zone" and MASSIVE manual braking! (No tail Hooks) challenging and Lots of fun
Thanks guys
Vito

You can make that comparison when you're doing it at night, your runway is swinging 30' up and down, your "zone" is 40' long, and your landing area is only 400' long. :D:p

Grumble,
All good points, you have my respect, I was explaining the way we land in such a short distance was utilizing the same procedures as what you guys use to land on a carrier deck with precision and accuracy consistently. But don't try to make carrier landings the stuff of mythical legend, you guys "always have a head wind, and never have to flare, you have 4 f%^cking wires, How can you miss!!":D

Vito:)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vito (Post 1281953)

You heard their new album? It's nothing short of awesome.

Watched the Moose guys land on the assault strips in theater more than a few times, freakin' awesome.