DYNASTY HVY

Sometimes I wonder what she was like to fly ?
So for those of you who flew her how about some insight .
YouTube - Lockheed L-1011 Tristar Take Off Delta Airlines
Sure miss the sound of those R/R



Fred

Dougdrvr

Only got to fly the sim a few times, but the Direct Lift Control on an ILS was interesting. I think it has "gust alliviation" on the ailerons, too.

Planespotta

Don't know how many ex-Tristar guys are on here, but here's a site with some fun stuff:

TriStar500.net | Features

pilotgolfer

I think you are referring to the MDLC. The spoilers would automatically extend a bit in cruise...I don't recall all the details. The DLC on approach was definately cool. With landing flaps out, the spoilers would deploy to a set position. If you were low on final and pulled back, the spoiler would retract to give you more lift. If you were high and pushed on the controls, you'd get more spoilers. This kept the deck angle constant which made it very stable.

The trim on the Tri-Star was awesome, too. It was a roller type thing you moved with your thumb. You could make very small changes with it.

I loved that airplane and all the cool places it took me to. 4 best years of flying with ATA!

Roll Inverted and Pull

Great machine...I flew it both in the US and internationally. Biggest fault was the RR RB 211 engines. That almost sunk the whole program because only the RR engine would fit into the center engine bay. Looked like, for awhile that would sink the program. Plastic fan blades that flew apart and aluminum cases that cracked were the problems, but all of that was finally solved. The DLC was developed for Lockheed`s version of the SST, which was awarded to Boeing, then abandoned. I will get some conflicting opinions, but in my opinion, the 1011 was far superior to the DC 10.The Brits are still flying some, as tankers, but don`t know if there are any others left. It handled about like a 767-300.

bcrosier

There were actually three separate systems involving spoilers and ailerons:

DLC (Direct Lift Control) - spoilers biased up to 7 degrees with landing flaps, then modulated between 0 and 14 degrees depending on the inputs from the control column - allowed you to control the glidepath on final with minimal pitch changes (exactly as Pilotgolfer described). Installed on all L-1011's

MDLC (Manuvering Direct Lift Control) - Deployed the spoilers slightly in response to maneuvering loads. I'd be lying if I told you I remembered exactly when and why it did so. Installed on the -500's, I'm not sure about the -250's.

ACS (Active Control System) - Deflected the ailerons to relieve bending moments on the wing of the -500 due to the extended wings. I'm not sure about the -250's.

As PG said, the trim system was the best of any aircraft I've ever flown - a roll or two of the thumb gave you exactly the amount of trim you needed. As an aside, many don't realize that the L-1011 actually used a stabilator instead of a conventional Horizontal Stabilizer/Elevator combination. The surface area of the L-1011 stabilator is the same as a DC-3 wing.

In a crosswind, when the one gear's truck tilted the spoilers would automatically partially deploy - helping to hold the aircraft on the ground without slamming it down as an MD-80 does. When the second truck tilted, the spoilers would fully deploy.

I don't even begin to recall all of the things the speed dougnut took into account - a few among them were (as best I recall), AOA, airspeed, acceleration, flap/slat position, ect. The bottom line was once you understood it, you could maintain approch speed within a knot or two.

Four hydraulic systems, and the ability to isolate practically any flight control and/or power source. In the event of a jammed stabilator, you could control pitch by selecting and deploying the inboard or outboard spoilers.

The RB-211 was a good engine, but it did have it's problems. It was NOT a quick starter - in the winter it could take in excess of four minutes to reach stabilized idle (two or three was more typical). Nothing growls like a 211 on startup (or reduces visibility like one in cool weather)!

The autoflight system was WAY ahead of it's time, it was still a good system 30 years after it was introduced.

A nice roomy cockpit! The DC-10/MD-11 is small by comparison, and the B-747 is dowright claustrophobic.

The L-1011 was a great aircraft, and should have been much more sucessful. As has been stated, one of the biggest problems was the developement difficulties with the Rolls powerplant, which put the program behind the DC-10. Having flown both, the engineering on the L-1011 is vastly superior to the DC-10 (much of the Douglas aircraft appears to have been designed in a hurry to beat the L-1011 to market). That sophistication was one the the L-1011's weak links - while true on any aircraft, particularly on the L-1011 you needed mechanics who really understood the systems and how to maintain the aircraft. It was not happy when it was neglected.

There is more, but in summary, I'll cite an old quote I've heard for years on airliners:
"Lockheed should design them, Boeing should build them, and Douglas should market them."

ERJF15

My old man was an Engineer on them for 15 years. All I hear is Lockheed invented this or that. That was on the L10 first.

Then he'll start talking about 141's, C-5's, and 130's with more Lockheed was the first!

I still wish they were still in the airline building business myself.

DYNASTY HVY

Interesting site indeed .thanks
Fred

IluvRNP

I have a lot of time in it. I think the others have said it all. I flew the 767 for almost 3 years before flying the L-1011 as captain. The 1011 was the clear winner for me.

aeromike49

Great plane and it does land OK in a 70 knot crosswind.