Something tells me this was something done by McDonnell Douglas to promote the MD-11 and used Swissair as an example given that they were one of the best of airlines in the industry of its time. The MD-11 was essentially a flop when it first came out (didn't meet it's operational requirements). So probably used as a marking tool to boost sales. I could be wrong though.
You are incorrect. I flew both the DC-10-30ER and MD-11. Although the MD-11 had a few issues at the beginning of it's introduction, those were worked out in due course much like any other newly minted aircraft. The plane was a pleasure to fly. It was made by what I considered the best aircraft maker in the world, the Douglas Aircraft Company. By the way, I watched the aircraft progress on the production line. Quality and craftsmanship, superb.
@@alexp3752 you read rather irrational for a pilot. Someone could make a wooden model plane with superb craftsmanship, but the aerodynamic drag, control surface layout, aerodynamic stability.....or, oh I don't know, the design of the cargo door locking mechanism could be beautifully made but poorly designed. You refer to the Douglas Aircraft Company as it was before the merger which was closer to the DC10 in era than the MD11. If it was such a great company, why did it do a dodgy deal with the FAA to avoid the cargo door being treated as an airworthiness issue, avoiding remedial work getting the independent inspection it desperately needed to prevent loss of hundreds of lives? Why didn't it occur to their engineers and their managers that blade-out testing isn't for nothing and their triple redundant hydraulics all had to go past one of those big energetic cylinders that did the blade-out thing... which they might need to mitigate and treat as a matter for anyone designing systems which ran right past it rather than just for the engine manufacturer? The MD11 has high wing sweep presumably to flatter a poor aerofoil, a rear CofG thus also rearward wing and MLG, and an especially small 'relaxed stability' horizontal stabiliser and these factors combined have not served it brilliantly in crosswind landings. The accidental extension of slats in cruise was too easy, happened multiple times and showing the 'relaxed stability' up badly which wasn't a full fly-by-wire logical overlay on pilot input but by direct autopilot control thus on disengagement the cruising stability went on holiday. This culminated in an incident where injuries were numerous and serious enough to lead to deaths in 2 cases, I think a flight attendant also suffered paralysis. These are more than niggling issues.
Actually, this Video was probably produced between 1991 (when the MD11 was first delivered) and before 1995, when the new livery was introduced. Also, there are SR DC-10 in the images, which left the fleet by 1992, so at least part of the footage must have been shot by then.
Swissair, I had to say, you really had a good airline there. It was sad when it shut down in 2002.
DC10 Y MD11 MIS AVIONES FAVORITOS BELLEZA
Something tells me this was something done by McDonnell Douglas to promote the MD-11 and used Swissair as an example given that they were one of the best of airlines in the industry of its time. The MD-11 was essentially a flop when it first came out (didn't meet it's operational requirements). So probably used as a marking tool to boost sales. I could be wrong though.
You are incorrect. I flew both the DC-10-30ER and MD-11. Although the MD-11 had a few issues at the beginning of it's introduction, those were worked out in due course much like any other newly minted aircraft. The plane was a pleasure to fly. It was made by what I considered the best aircraft maker in the world, the Douglas Aircraft Company. By the way, I watched the aircraft progress on the production line. Quality and craftsmanship, superb.
@@alexp3752 why did/does it have such a bad reputation? especially the dc-10 and md-11?
@@l.n963 According to who? The media?
@@l.n963multiple dc-10 crashes related to mcdouglas engineering and md-11 didnt meet all range and performance capabilities they advertised it for
@@alexp3752 you read rather irrational for a pilot. Someone could make a wooden model plane with superb craftsmanship, but the aerodynamic drag, control surface layout, aerodynamic stability.....or, oh I don't know, the design of the cargo door locking mechanism could be beautifully made but poorly designed.
You refer to the Douglas Aircraft Company as it was before the merger which was closer to the DC10 in era than the MD11. If it was such a great company, why did it do a dodgy deal with the FAA to avoid the cargo door being treated as an airworthiness issue, avoiding remedial work getting the independent inspection it desperately needed to prevent loss of hundreds of lives?
Why didn't it occur to their engineers and their managers that blade-out testing isn't for nothing and their triple redundant hydraulics all had to go past one of those big energetic cylinders that did the blade-out thing... which they might need to mitigate and treat as a matter for anyone designing systems which ran right past it rather than just for the engine manufacturer?
The MD11 has high wing sweep presumably to flatter a poor aerofoil, a rear CofG thus also rearward wing and MLG, and an especially small 'relaxed stability' horizontal stabiliser and these factors combined have not served it brilliantly in crosswind landings. The accidental extension of slats in cruise was too easy, happened multiple times and showing the 'relaxed stability' up badly which wasn't a full fly-by-wire logical overlay on pilot input but by direct autopilot control thus on disengagement the cruising stability went on holiday. This culminated in an incident where injuries were numerous and serious enough to lead to deaths in 2 cases, I think a flight attendant also suffered paralysis. These are more than niggling issues.
Am Schluss wo steht „Always Happy Landings“ musste ich sofort an die Katastrophe von Halifax denken..🥲
I hope you can find some footage of the Douglas DC-10, on which the MD-11 was based.
3:35 the same alert heard in the final moments on SR111
This Video was made after the 1998 crash. To promote a little bit the aircraft and reassure the passengers.
Actually, this Video was probably produced between 1991 (when the MD11 was first delivered) and before 1995, when the new livery was introduced. Also, there are SR DC-10 in the images, which left the fleet by 1992, so at least part of the footage must have been shot by then.
Its obvious this was before 98.
@@flySwissairHB-IWF had the old livery during the summer of 1997. Maybe the last MD11 to be repainted.
Best plane forever ❤️
min 5:10 HB-IWF ???
Unfortunately yes
Sind Landungen mit der MD 11 wirklich so schwierig bei schlechtem Wetter?
Pegis Cove war grauenhaft
Schlimmstes Ereignis in der Geschichte der Swissair
5:10 HB-IWF ???
Looks like HB-IWT
@@quoverlord9398 HB-IWT never had the old Swissair livery as it joined their fleet in 1998.
must be HB-IWI or HB-IWF then
@@quoverlord9398Juding by the coat of arms of the canton it's named after, it seems to be Vaud. So it's indeed HB-IWF.
@@coconutdreams1238 Its honestly amazing you can tell by that. Thanks!
Swissair shut down
Ah fuck no
Why was this video made?
I figured so people can see it, see the old airline of Switzerland, but if it doesnt please you you can always refrain from watching it
Why is any video made?
Why is any video made?