DC10

[72te27]

Astro14 wrote: "Cargo planes sit for most of the day. Passenger planes fly most of the day."

Yeah, but passenger planes sit for most of the night. Cargo planes fly for most of the night.
(Mostly j/k. I get what you're saying.)

 

[youdontwannaknow]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
I saw that too, but was I too uninterested in correcting his tirade to do anything about it. It's amazing when people post junk as "fact" when they are completely wrong.

The point about the cargo doors is partially correct. They are unusual in that they are not plug doors, but the real issue was with the "latched and locked" indication. The latches and pins were adequately designed, but it was all to easy for the door to appear to be locked when it was not. While blamed on the mechanism, it is also true that ground crews improperly secured the doors (overfilled compartments). Since there was no indication that the door was not completely latched it became a critical safety issue.

To be afraid to fly them is unfounded though. Their safety record after the door modification program is completely in line with other similar airframes. A Netflix documentary is not exactly a definitive statement on this aircraft.

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: youdontwannaknow
It was really a refuel tanker KC-10 originally. No surprise they are now banished to lowly cargo duty.

Yeah...no.

The DC-10 went into service with American Airlines in 1971.

The KC-10 went into service with the USAF in 1981.

This was a passenger plane converted to tanker after it had been flying in passenger service. Much like the 767 and the KC-46 today.


Thanks, actually I am glad someone corrected me.

Sorry if it sounded like a "tirade" but that cargo door issue was quite shocking (to me at least). Heck I could have been on one of those planes! Whatever the cause or reason or excuse might be who knows how many times it could have happened and how many lives lost ? and how many lives lost could have actually been avoided if this would have dealt with more diligently.
And documentaries, netflix or otherwise, are still based on facts they dont make things up. Sure there are conspiracy theory documentaries too but you can tell which ones are those.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: 72te27
Astro14 wrote: "Cargo planes sit for most of the day. Passenger planes fly most of the day."

Yeah, but passenger planes sit for most of the night. Cargo planes fly for most of the night.
(Mostly j/k. I get what you're saying.)


I know, I understand...it's a question of utilization rates...and I was being overly simplistic...But UAL, for example has an average utilization of 10.5 hours/day. I don't have FedEx numbers, but I think they're about half that (the average includes all the airplanes that are in for maintenance and overhaul, so the average airplane on the line is flying much more per day than the average block hours). There is actually a really interesting set of analyses here, if you're into the geekery: http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/Aircraft&Related.html

 

[kschachn]

And sorry I tiraded too... I extrapolated my limited experience with the DC-9/MD-80/717 airframes into other aircraft which is a bad thing to do. I just knew that the lack of outward-opening doors on these aircraft was a safety feature.

Originally Posted By: youdontwannaknow
Sorry if it sounded like a "tirade" but that cargo door issue was quite shocking (to me at least). Heck I could have been on one of those planes! Whatever the cause or reason or excuse might be who knows how many times it could have happened and how many lives lost ? and how many lives lost could have actually been avoided if this would have dealt with more diligently.
And documentaries, netflix or otherwise, are still based on facts they dont make things up. Sure there are conspiracy theory documentaries too but you can tell which ones are those.

 

[kschachn]

On a lighter note, you want to know what is really bad on older airplanes? Recirculating toilets.

Those are two words that should never, ever be in the same sentence.

 

[zuluplus30]

Originally Posted By: 72te27
My ambiguous post was referencing UPS flying MD11's.

Zuluplus30, do you work Kansas City or Indy Center?


Gotcha. Kansas City.

 

[72te27]

Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
Originally Posted By: 72te27
My ambiguous post was referencing UPS flying MD11's.

Zuluplus30, do you work Kansas City or Indy Center?


Gotcha. Kansas City.

I'm sure we've talked. You guys do great job!

 

[WobblyElvis]

I worked on DC 10's and 747s in the 1980's. The DC 10 was a little more of a hot rod compared to the 747 although the cruise speed of the 10 was a little less. Pain working on that #2 engine. I liked the 10 a little better but I have to admit if the DC 10 came in with a problem it was a little harder to get it back in the air. The 747 could be put back in service with more maintenance items deferred as per the MEL. Minimum equipment list. The cargo bay was better in the DC 10, the floor nice and flat. In the 747 you could twist an ankle if you weren't careful. Too many gaping holes in the floor.

 

[d4d]

Although my DC-10 (-40) crew member experience is really limited, I thought it was a very complex, but problematic airplane. Certainly a Cadillac design over the early Boeing jets and maybe that was part of the problem.

Coming from the 727, it was a Second Officers dream (nightmare)...it had full electronic pressurization; you could transfer fuel between fuel tanks; it was quiet; it had a Delco INS for nav; it flew international routes, etc.

In my limited experience, it also was problem plagued- in the roughly 150 hours that I plumbed on it, I had landing gear problems (center gear), a center duct overheat/fire, boost pump cb's constantly popping, etc. You had to be really careful with thrust lever movements at altitude as I recall. I was amazed at the mechanical issues that I saw in such a short stint on the jet. In fairness, I had friends that flew it for years and loved it! Me, not so much. I was glad to go on to an F/O job on the 727.

I never saw the frequency of mechanical issues that I saw on this airframe in thousands of hours of flying on B 727's, 757's, 747-400's or Airbus 320 and 330 jets. Just my limited experience on the "Death Cruiser 10" from the mid-1980's...YMMV

 

[zuluplus30]

Originally Posted By: 72te27
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
Originally Posted By: 72te27
My ambiguous post was referencing UPS flying MD11's.

Zuluplus30, do you work Kansas City or Indy Center?


Gotcha. Kansas City.

I'm sure we've talked. You guys do great job!


Thank you! We try to stay out of your way and just let you guys run. Sometimes Indy traffic management has other plans though. We'd love to dole out direct CHERI..KSDF all day every day if we could. What equipment are you on?

 

[72te27]

Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
Originally Posted By: 72te27
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
Originally Posted By: 72te27
My ambiguous post was referencing UPS flying MD11's.

Zuluplus30, do you work Kansas City or Indy Center?


Gotcha. Kansas City.

I'm sure we've talked. You guys do great job!


Thank you! We try to stay out of your way and just let you guys run. Sometimes Indy traffic management has other plans though. We'd love to dole out direct CHERI..KSDF all day every day if we could. What equipment are you on?
Lol! I'm on the A300 for some big brown company. We LIVE for direct CHERI! You guys actually work really hard to give us shortcuts when you can. We do recognize that. We know that when you slow us down, Indy Center or
Louisville Approach has been on the phone, yelling. OTOH, getting cleared direct to something 1000 miles away is nice too. Flying at night has its benefits.