THE DC10 AIRCRAFT


#1

How many DC10 aircraft are left flying today. I loved these jets back in its era but hardly see them about have any gone onto cargo life from being with airliners in the past and where can I find good photo’s of them


#2

lmgtfy.com/?q=dc10%27s+still+in+service


#3

airfleets.net/listing/dc10-1.htm


#4

so nice to still see these aircraft still about I had no problem flying on them and the aeroplane itself was fantastic very advanced in its Era of the seventies. Nice worl guys like the links and photo’s :laughing:


#5

Not many of these good old aircraft around now most are in the deserts parted out or sitting there corroding away or half scrapped.


#6

I remember these aircraft well myself. Lufthansa operated them as well as ANZ but they got a bad name this was due to the operators neglecting them and not following the aeroplanes manual which caused horrific crashes and deaths need I say.

With the Kiwi airline anz which they lost this young DC10-30 in the Antarctic in 1979. The company was at fault from the start to the end when all 257 passengers and crew perished. This was not the fault of the DC10-30 aircraft at all. Perfectly safe airworthy. Just over looked the wrong flight plan entered into the aircrafts computer which slammed it into a mountain. It still remains there after all these years.

AA DC10 1979 FLT AA191. engine came away from main wing pylon. American Airlines at fault for that not following manual procedures and using a forklift to host up the engine to the pylon cracking it and not correctly securing it.

1974 Turkish Airlines DC10 hit the floor of the forest outside of Paris killing all 346 men women and children. Not the aircrafts fault but the person not certified to close the cargo door which it ripped open sending the plane at uncontrollable speed into the forest.


#7

After the accident it was determined that there were a number of airlines using this procedure, not just AA. There was another “unauthorized” procedure that involved a hoist as opposed the the forklift that UA was using. Securing had nothing to do with it. Fatigue on the aft pylon attach fitting. Using the forklift, in the case of 191, had bent the mounting bracket where subsequent fatigue set in.

Not entirely true. The door had been modified in an unauthorized manner. AA 96 had a cargo door failure similar to Turkish 981 but was able declare an emergency and land. MD subsequent to both incidents made modifications to the aircraft.


#8

I actually studied both incidents from years ago. In some way your right but It was found that in 1974 it was not a failure of the cargo door opening inflight rather a worker on the ground who closed this rear small door didn’t follow the correct procedures. But a faulty light also triggered this to say all was well. While climbing out from Paris Orly airport on the 3rd March 1974. The aircraft was reacting normally until the rear cargo door light came on. The pins had not being secured properly from closing and forcing the door to shut. Once at a certain level the pressure from the out side of the aircraft manage to buckle the door which ripped it open with force. this sent the aircraft into a sharp dive which caused it to gain uncontrollable speeds and never exceeded speed or over speed.

AA 191 was the poor result of maintence and neglect not following the aircraft manual procedures the plane maker had given. Which must be followed by regulation and law and set out by the FAA. This was found to be in three of the american carriers who preformed this hosting the engines onto the pylons causing server cracks and not correctly in place. UAL AA Continental and Pan Am all did this.


#9

I flew many DC10 aircraft and found they were good flying machines never a moment there was listening to them roar and grind those huge turbo fan GE engines down the runway and leap up into the air sharply. But I always wondered why on approach the aircraft was always tilted or pitched nose up on landing. Does anyone have that info on that. Normally you see aircraft pitched slightly downwards on approach. But the DC10 and the L1011’S DID THIS. :smiley: :confused:


#10

Just a guess - to keep the air flowing correctly in the number 2 (tail) engine?


#11

THe reason behind the Tri Jet DC10 aircraft why its nose was pitched up was not just to flow air through number two but to balance the aircraft out as the tail section was more heavy then the rest of the aircraft itself. This was to reduce drag many use to fully extended flaps so they had balance on landing. :slight_smile: :slight_smile:


#12

KLM is still flying an MD-11 into Montreal daily. Watched it land yesterday… a beautiful sight…


#13

Martinair also have a MD11 cargo flight I have seen recently and KLM I see a lot arriving at KLAX


#14

KLM flew their last MD-11 flight last night, Montreal to Amsterdam…


#15

The USAF still maintain 59 KC-10’s, which were DC-10’s modified on the assembly line for the aerial refueling/cargo carrying mission built from the late 70’s to the late 80’s. I turned many a wrench on this airframe in my USAF days at Seymour Johnson AFB in NC. Though there are still various, ongoing attempts to retire the aircraft, as it stands now they are scheduled to continue in service for many years to come. :smiley:


#16

59 KC 10’S OR DC 10’S still in service that’s great news to here :smiley:


#17

They are much liked in USAF. I wish I had a nickle for every 135 I had to hear roaring down the runway and the KC-10 was just coming on-line as I was getting out, and many a pilot was itching to get their hands on one. I could have sworn one of the cargo express companies still operate them on night flights but I could be wrong.


#18

FedEx has around 60 each of DC10 and MD11 aircraft in service.

Marty


#19

Ten Tanker has three- T910, 911, 912 as aerial firefighting tankers. I believe T910 is retiring this year.