dckozak

We have a name for guys that leave the MD for the triple.

JetJocF14

International Pilots.

Timbo

We have a name for guys that leave the MD for the triple.





Well here you go:

With Last MD-11 Passenger Flight, Another Aviation Icon Goes Away

Read the full article, then get back to me...

Timbo

It appears the link above is bad. Here's the article in full:

With Last MD-11 Passenger Flight, Another Aviation Icon Goes Away

By Alberto Riva @albertoriva on October 26 2014 11:27 AM

• Share on facebook 1.2k
• Share on twitter 40
• Share on linkedin 16
• Share on google_plusone_share
• More Sharing Services
• 48

AMSTERDAM -- The last three-engined widebody airplane in commercial passenger service made its last revenue flight Sunday, consigning to history yet another symbol of the jet age. The last flight operated by a McDonnell Douglas MD-11, a KLM Royal Dutch Airlines service from Montreal, landed early Sunday in Amsterdam. The exit from service of the MD-11 marks the demise of the last intercontinental, double-aisle jet made by a Western planemaker other than Boeing or Airbus.
The event attracted hundreds of aviation enthusiasts from all over the world, who booked a seat on flight KL672 to witness firsthand the retirement of an airplane that made its name as the last American competitor to Boeing jumbos. To many of them -- a flight attendant estimated enthusiasts occupied nearly half of the 285 seats -- it was an occasion to relive an era they said had ended.
"When I was young, you went to an airport and every airline had its own type," said Achim Linde, a 47-year-old architect from Berlin who had planned a vacation to North America to be on the last MD-11 flight. "The Russians flew Soviet jets, the French flew Caravelles made by Sud-Aviation. Now it's just Airbus and Boeing."
The airline, mindful of the growing clout of the avgeek subculture -- something between a hobby and a lifestyle, whose devotees crisscross the globe in pursuit of unusual airplanes -- had planned events in Montreal and Amsterdam around the flight. Fire trucks gave the jet a water-cannon salute at both ends, airport vehicles escorted it in a motorcade when it landed, and on-board meals included special sweets with the MD-11 logo and champagne. Passengers could also access the flight deck when the plane was on the ground, a near-impossible feat since 9/11.

Aviation enthusiasts photograph the last MD-11 in commercial service as it docks at a gate at Montreal's Dorval airport, Oct 25, 2014 IBTimes / Alberto Riva
Yet, for all its romantic cachet and sleek lines, the MD-11 was a commercial flop that sold only 200 units over a short production run from 1988 to 2000, and was haunted by a poor safety record. Conceived by McDonnell Douglas as a bigger successor to the DC-10, which was also retired this year, it was plagued by issues including higher fuel burn than anticipated and poor reliability in its initial years, which cost airlines money.
Pilots loved the roomy cockpit with large digital displays, but were less enamored of the plane's nervous temperament. The MD-11 was famously hard to land, and especially balky when the wind came from its side. Landing crashes accounted for five of the nine MD-11 accidents. According to data published by Boeing and updated through 2013, it had had 3.62 accidents with hull losses per million departures, far more than contemporary large jets. The MD-11 was almost four times more likely to crash, statistically, than the Boeing 747 series 400.
"The flight deck was the best I've worked in, but as far as aerodynamics, the plane didn't fly well," a captain for Italian airline Alitalia, who asked to remain anonymous, told International Business Times during a flight in 2007 aboard a Boeing 777, the airplane that largely killed off the MD-11. Able to fly farther and with more passengers, but using just two engines, the 777 was much more fuel efficient, and swept up the market for medium-to-large size long-range widebodies. The trijet's sales disaster was a prime cause in the demise of McDonnell Douglas, which was bought by Boeing in 1997.
KLM captain Erwin Gabel, who commanded the last flight, would not speak disparagingly of the jet he was ushering into aviation's hall of fame (the landing, by the way, was remarkably smooth). He did say, speaking to passengers at the boarding gate in Montreal, it was time for more fuel-efficient models.

KLM captains Erwin Gabel (L), Nico Verdose (C) and first officer Michiel De Bruyn (R) display cupcakes celebrating the last flight of the MD-11 and the airline's 95th year in operation. IBTimes / Alberto Riva
The MD-11's cargo version soldiers on, with FedEx as its largest operator, and will likely fly on for several years. The passenger models have lost nearly all value except as sources of parts for other airplanes -- which will be the fate of KLM's last one, said the final flight's first officer, Michiel De Bruyne. It will be flown to a storage location, most likely in the United States, and taken apart for spares.
But even on its way to the scrap yard, the last ship of its kind went out with class.
KLM christens all of its aircraft with individual names; its 10 MD-11s bore those of distinguished women, such as Florence Nightingale and Maria Montessori. The one that made the last flight displayed proudly the name of a Dutch icon of style: Audrey Hepburn.

Enthusiasts photograph the "Audrey Hepburn" from the Amsterdam airport's viewing terrace as she is towed away form the gate to be parked remotely after her last scheduled flight. IBTimes / Alberto Riva

Yoda2

Then there is the old saying that airplanes fly like they look. I have found this to be true in most cases. It seems so with this comparison...

Timbo

I didn't think it was all that ugly, certainly not as ugly as the A380, but here's the part pilots didn't like:

Pilots loved the roomy cockpit with large digital displays, but were less enamored of the plane's nervous temperament. The MD-11 was famously hard to land, and especially balky when the wind came from its side. Landing crashes accounted for five of the nine MD-11 accidents. According to data published by Boeing and updated through 2013, it had had 3.62 accidents with hull losses per million departures, far more than contemporary large jets. The MD-11 was almost four times more likely to crash, statistically, than the Boeing 747 series 400. "The flight deck was the best I've worked in, but as far as aerodynamics, the plane didn't fly well," a captain for Italian airline Alitalia, who asked to remain anonymous, told International Business Times during a flight in 2007 aboard a Boeing 777, the airplane that largely killed off the MD-11. Able to fly farther and with more passengers, but using just two engines, the 777 was much more fuel efficient, and swept up the market for medium-to-large size long-range widebodies. The trijet's sales disaster was a prime cause in the demise of McDonnell Douglas, which was bought by Boeing in 1997.

Delta had 5 'hard landing' incidents, each with major damage to the tail. All 5 were done by Instructors or Line Check Airmen. I treated it with great respect and never had a bad landing, but I kept one eye on the CG, as if it was aft of about 28%, it would swap ends on you in the flare, you had to be ready for that and not pull back too much in the flare.

Yoda2

Just in case, I wasn't implying ugly so much as it just doesn't look "right". It looks like what it is, an adaptation and cheap attempt to capture a market segment. Too bad the Falcon 20 wasn't stretched for FedEx!

dckozak

Certainly this airplane has had its hard knocks. My airline has been at the fore front of its painful legacy. That said, from my experience, It doesn't take a superman to fly this jet (I'm proof of that ) . My worry is not how it flys while in the envelop, but how it (could) react when pushed out of it.
No pilot goes out and tries to bend an airplane; it happens because of circumstances, and possibly being too cavalier about being in the right attitude and right airspeed, especially in the flare. Fly it the way your taught, don't be afraid to go around when things aren't right, and don't fear it.

Timbo

Do you guys have any limitations on aft CG landings yet? When I flew it, 1996-2000, there were none, but it was a completely different airplane at 25%, 28% and 32%! Our hard landings all happened with an aft CG.

With that tail fuel management system, I always kept one eye on the CG number on the EICAS, just so I knew what to expect, but I also hand flew it to cruise (sometimes only FL 280 when going ATL-NRT!) and down from 2000' on landing.

I had a great IP when I checked out on it, he had flown the DC10, KC10 and MD11. He had lots of good gouge on what to do, and what NOT to do, when hand flying it!

dckozak

We do not, but that is an interesting point I'll raise with our LCA's or at the school house when I see them. From my experience, the CG is always fairly far forward, no doubt a function of carrying normal freight rather than the self loading type you guys fly

No doubt getting good training in IOE will make your transition to this jet a lot smoother!