The L-1011 was also less successful because it was a maintenance nightmare, it was very expensive and difficult to maintain, making it a mechanic's worst headache. I remember asking one of Lockheed's engineers who worked on the L-1011 why they stopped making commercial planes, since they built them so well. His response was, "We know how to make perfect commercial aircraft, but we don’t know how to make them cost-effective"
@@massmike11, yes, on B787 Boeing spared no expenses and it significantly outsells A330neo, although it is also noticeably more expensive. But we are talking about DC-10…
L-1011 had the most advanced avionics bar none of any airliner of its day. What you see today in a modern flight deck FMS owes a lot to the L-1011's innovations but all the gear cost a lot back in the day as this was the first commercial aircraft approved to do a Cat III autoland in zero visibility if I am not mistaken. The growth of reliability of engines and changes to ETOPs is what truly killed 3 and 4 engine jets in passenger service along with the change from international travel becoming more point to point flights in smaller jets vs fewer hub and spoke flights in larger jets. Only the longest and busiest routes can justify a B747 or A380 economically in the current market for passenger service.
I flew on both jets: American Airlines DC-10 and TWA L-1011. I found the L1011 to be just a wonderful plane. It was roomy and so stable you didn't even notice takeoffs or most turbulence, and the plane had a great safety record.
I flew on both of these many times, and I loved both planes. The automatic doors that retracted into the ceiling were very cool. First time I had seen in an airliner the lighted indicators at the front of the cabin that told you whether the lavatories were all occupied. On United’s DC-10’s you could listen to air traffic control on the headset (on “Channel 9”). In the late 1970’s I flew on an American Airlined DC-10 out of San Diego, and as a young kid I was amazed. While boarding, they were showing local TV news on the screens in the cabin. Of course, it was coming in through a TV antennae so the reception was terrible, but it seemed very cool to even able to do that at the time. Just before takeoff, the captain made an announcement and turned on a live video camera feed that was in the back of the cockpit and showed the view out of the cockpit windscreen. Again, the concept was better than the reality, as the black and white live video wasn’t very sharp and combined with the projection technology it was the furthest thing from high def. But it was so cool that they even had that feature. (That feature was quietly removed from all AA DC-10’s after the 1979 crash at ORD). Both trijets seemed to be loaded with high-tech, which really impressed me as a kid. Much cooler than the 727-200 Advanced and 737-200’s I usually flew on at the time….
I flew the 1011 once from Chicago to Hartford, Ct. I loved every minute of it. What a wonderful plane. They handed out free earphones and you could plug them into the armrest and tune to one of several channels to listen to music or the conversation berween the pilots and ATC. Naturally, I chose the latter. The flight was so smooth that even though I was listening in on the pilots, I couldn't tell that the plane was descending until the wheels actually hit the runway. Greatest flight experience I ever had.
I flew on the L-1011 several times. I don't care about cost or efficiency, all I know is that when I flew on it, the leg room was amazing and if a really fat person sat next to you, the blubber didn't fall over onto your side. Also, the ghost of Flight 401 said there would not be another crash of an L-1011. I believe he was right.
Hi! I am a United Airline Brat. My late "Beloved" Dad started at UAL South City in 1946. My Dad retired 32 years later as "General Foreman" in charge of maintenance / utilities for the Entire Base. Dad was an electricians mate 1st class USCG Combat South Pacific when he started. He left with 9 foremen, and 600+ mechanics as subordinates. I flew on ALL the Propliners from DC-3 Up. Flew on all the Douglas jets, and, Boeings. The L-1011 was a much nicer jet. The 10 was good too, but the L-1011 was a beautiful jet. Keith USCG Vietnam Veteran
I flew Air Canada's L1011-1 YYZ-MIA and connected to Pan AM's L1011-500 to GIG & MVD in 1978. The fondest memory I have is seeing a Pan Am DC-10 in MIA onboard their L-1011, Pan Am had both planes! Ten years later I repeated the flight on Canadian's DC-10-30er YYZ-GIG and then boarded Varig's DC-10-30 to MVD. Varig's cabin service was top notch. 👌
I prefer the Lockheed TriStar over the DC-10. In your eyes, the DC-10 was more successful because it was on the market first but it was only able to do that because McDonnell Douglas cut corners with the design and production and those decisions were big contributors to the high profile crashes that it had . ( The official reports from the National Transportation Safety Board, back this up). Success is not just measured in sales. The L1011 was a success because of the affection that many travelers had for it, even long after they've been retired. The L1011 was more comfortable and everytime I flew on one, I felt safe and knew that Lockheed had my comfort and safety in mind. There was No fear that cargo doors or engines would break off of an L1011. At time stamp 4:41, if that DC-10 was N110AA, that was the jet involved in the horrendous crash at Chicago on May 25, 1979 😢.
It also had the added benefit of gaining a stellar reputation with pilots and even maintenance crews (though generally more complicated to work on) - this definitely trickled back to the operators who enjoyed the TriStar as such. Unfortunately, earning such a reputation didn’t really do anything for Lockheed - except perhaps for the history books and casual conversation, as they never again offered a commercial airliner. Such a shame, as I don’t ever see that changing… MD becoming Boeing and there being a complete duopoly now, even an innovative company like Lockheed would never be able to break into a market like that ever again.
The engine falling of was because AA maint crews didn’t follow the procedure required by MDD. The cargo door DID work but was complicated and if not closed properly ( training issue) could be a problem.
"cut corners with the design and production and those decisions were big contributors to the high profile crashes" So cargo door fine points and wing engine mounts tolerant of gross abuse are what would have held up production? Seems far fetched, yet people are always trying to tie the accidents to the aircraft's design supposedly having been "rushed". Mandatory 60-hour work weeks for the engineers were how it got done sooner.
Being 27, I have been lucky enough to fly on both. I flew on the northwest DC-10-30 back when I was nine and the Delta L-1011 when I was a year and a half old. I don't have any memory of flying on the L-1011, but remember all the old technology on the DC-10. I wish it was possible for the public to fly on them again.
You missed the entire actual point as to why the DC-10 outsold the TriStar. Douglas had much more experience, and planned ahead for longer range versions, and Lockheed did not. The DC-10 had a dual keel frame at the bottom of the fuselage, which allowed installing that third center gear on the DC-10-30/40 versions. Lockheed could not easily add additional landing gear, and so it could not be updated to take additional weight. Lockheed’s only option was to shorten the fuselage to create a longer range version. THAT is why the DC-10 ultimately outsold the TriStar…
You've saved me the trouble of what I usually post in DC-10/L-1011 comments sections. A few addendums: The original DC-10-10 had a mostly-empty space underneath the floor in the middle called the Center Accessory Compartment. A few systems things were attached to the walls of it, but mostly it was a big box waiting to be filled up with a two-wheel center main landing gear someday when it was time to start building much higher weight versions. One neat thing about the CAC was how one could go from the cabin all the way down to the ground via hatches in the cabin floor and fuselage bottom. The L-1011-500 long(er) range version did sport a very modest weight increase. They raised tire pressures as much as they could, but that came at a price in terms of airport compatibility: Higher pressure wears out the pavements faster, and airports may charge accordingly or even restrict weight (in which case you're sort of back where you started). So the main thing, as noted above, was to chop out fuselage/seats in order to gain range. Not really competitive with the DC-10 at that point, depending on an airline's routes, but at least it gave Lockheed something to sell... especially to existing 1011 operators looking to go long without switching brands.
Canadians were in a unique position as Air Canada operated the 1011 and Canadian Pacific flew the DC10. I flew on both many times and they were both outstanding aircraft.
I did at least one flight in each of those two. I remember I really liked the DC-10 and never had that feeling anymore in another plane. I don't know why; maybe because I was still a kid?
I was in Trinidad and Tobago when the national airline, British West Indian Airlines, (B.W.I.A.) now Caribbean Airlines, got three (3) L-1011 Tri-Stars. They looked majestic in Piarco Airport. It seemed that many of the major global airlines had the Tri-Star i.e. British Airways, Air Canada, Eastern, Delta, to name a few. Also, the Tri-Star was featured in a lot of movies and television shows. I smiled when I saw it in "Die Hard 2". In the music video for Bob Marley and the Wailers' "Waiting In Vain," the 'young Bob Marley' appeared to have travelled on the British Airways Tri-Star. How I envied him!!!! I was fortunate to have flown on both the DC-10, and far more often on the Tri-Star. Both were nice, no complaints whatsoever. But I was certainly more of a fan of the Tri-Star. I knew how modern it was and, on top of all that, the top engine just seemed to be a better design. I'm sorry that the Tri-Star is gone from public service but such is progress. I can hope for the Tri-Star to make a glorious return, but alas, I too would be waiting in vain.
I only once flew on a TriStar, but it was a pretty special flight: on board one of the four KC1 aircraft operated by the RAF, on a flight to the Falkland Islands via Ascension Island. I was on my way to Antarctica.
I remember the marketing campaign of Fly Delta's Big Jets" And that I finally did when I was about 14. L1011 IAH to ORD .. I remember being amazed at the spaciousness and how cool it was to plug in my headphones and listen to Linda Ronstadt and sip a coke. Later I flew the DC10 with my Dad to LAX and we had a window seat with full view of the monster engine dangling and bouncing as rolled for take-off . (this was about a year after the AA DC10 tragedy where the engine fell off) and . We were holding our collective breaths.
I flew from LAX to Honolulu on an L-1011. This was right after the 1979 AA Flight 191 DC-10 Chicago crash. At that point, the FAA had grounded the DC-10. While I was over in Hawaii, it was determined the DC-10s could fly again, because the cause of the crash was improper maintenance procedures at AA. As we lined up to board our return flight, I asked the airline employee what kind of plane we would be on. The response was "a modern jet, sir" I asked a second time, same answer. So I flat out asked, "is it a DC-10?" She responded with "yes". There were audible gasps from others in the line. I was fairly certain we'd be on a DC-10, but I wanted to know. So I could make an informed decision on going or not. Obviously, the flight was fine. People in 2024 either don't remember, or are too young to know, how common it was to have US commercial aircraft crash every year. Just check the stats. The 747 has been involved in numerous fatal incidents. Killing many hundreds of people over the years. Including luggage compartment doors failing during flight, sucking passengers out of the plane to their death. And running a couple of them through the engines. Those 60 KC-10 AF planes were in demanding service for many years. They only lost one. It was being refurbished, and was destroyed by fire, while on the ground.
I flew on a WardAir DC-10 in September 1979. The only thing I really remember about it was that it was just 4 months after the crash in Chicago, so I had that thought in the back of my mind for the entire flight.
ATA Airlines [American Trans Air] was the last airline to have a major fleet of them, and in the beautiful Vaction livery. It would be nice to see videos on ATA, Eastern, Panam and the other airlines going over their wise and fall. The L1011 was one amazing plane!
unfortunately, i never had a ride on the L1011. they were quite popular back in the days with LTU to several holiday destinations. but on the other hand, i had the oppurtinity to fly with the DC10 a couple of times with lufthansa and condor, including a beautiful landing in djerba where i was allowed to stay on the jumpseat. i love this plane! :)
although the DC10 sold more and some models are still flying in cargo capacity, the Tristar's safety record speaks volumes i feel, not perfect but it didn't suffer design failures that blew out cargo doors
I traveled on the L-1011 on TWA, Saudia and Gulf Air. A great comfortable aircraft. The DC-10 had a god awful 2-5-2 seating arrangement that was very uncomfortable on Continental.
The issue with tight seating configurations is that the airlines are squeezing more, narrower seats in a row as compared to when the aircraft were first placed into service. The DC-10's early economy seating configuration was 2-4-2 and there was actually a gap separating the innermost seats (though this gap was too narrow to create a third aisle). Both American and Western Airlines described that all DC-10 economy seats were in pairs. You can find early advertising images showing cutaway views of these airliners. You may also have noticed that economy seating in the Boeing 777 is now usually ten across; and not nine like it used to be.
@@tim_davidson6344 Less cramped seats at first, and a piano bar in the back with lounge seating for use during cruise on some aircraft. Hard to imagine nowadays that flying was much of anything other than a cattle car, but until demand outstripped supply there were free perks like that to attract customers.
I flew on both at some time. I believe the DC-10 was the first plane I ever flew on maybe 35 years ago. I rode an L-1011 back to Minneapolis from Las Vegas once. Great plane. What I remember most was the 5 or more restrooms lined up in back of the plane. Very comfortable experience made even more so because of only a half full flight. It seems the pilot had to circle the airport several times because of a bad snowstorm and very poor visibility. We finally broke through the clouds though and landed with no problems. 😊
I felt safer on the L-1011 than the DC-10. I flew on a DC-10 from Philadelphia to Los Angeles back in 1988. I flew on an L-1011 in 1995 from Chicago to Atlanta. Even though it was on its way to being decommissioned, the L-1011 still had a way smoother flight.
The most memorable school trip in elementary school was to San Juan International in the mid 70’s. Imagine a busload of kids waltzing through security into the terminal then the boarding gate, through the air bridge and into an Eastern Airlines L-1011 for a tour of the plane! Some of us interrupted the flight attendant wanting to ask her when are we gonna take off. I thought that was the whole point of the school trip: to take a ride on the plane! But so it happened my family went on several trips to the US mainland and up until the mid 80’s they were mostly on Eastern 1011’s since that was the main airline and aircraft type flying out of SJU for domestic flights at the time
My first wide body was a TWA L-1011 (June 1984) Also flew a Delta L-1011, and several Northwest DC-10’s throughout the 80’s and 90’s. The L-1011 is my favorite aircraft - beautiful machine!
I flew on the DC-10 a few times, all during my US Navy days. The first time I flew on it was when I left boot camp. It was mid October of 1980 aboard United Flight 225, ORD-SAN. When we were at O'Hare taxiing to the runway, the captain told us it was 32 degrees outside, and we could see snowflakes wafting around the windows. When the captain said that San Diego was checking in sunny at a balmy 74 degrees, I was elated! San Diego was my next duty station. The flight was smooth and uneventful. One of the guys from our sister company voiced reservations about the engines falling off; this was perhaps a year after that American Airlines DC-10 had crashed after taking off from O'Hare, killing all on board. I wasn't worried about it. One, the crash had been the result of improper maintenance procedures; the crash had nothing to do with the aircraft. Two, by that point, the DC-10 had been so scrutinized that it was no doubt the safest aircraft in the air back in the early 1980s! The flight was smooth and uneventful. From my window seat, I could see and hear the big, port side GE CF6 singing its song hour after hour during the flight. The aircraft was comfortable; they were more roomy back then vs. now. I remember being thrilled to have those headphones, so I could listen to music at my seat! I remember hearing the cult favorite, "Turning Japanese", by The Vapors. That was considered high tech, in-flight entertainment back then...
I am 58 years old, and in the early to mid 1980s, I had flown on one DC-10 on Capitol Airways from JFK to ORD, one L-1011 on Pan Am from MIA to JFK, and an Eastern L-1011 from LGA to MIA. I remember the Eastern one made quite a loud buzzing like sound on takeoff from the engines that most other aircraft types do not have. I even remember watching some take off from JFK and hearing that buzzing sound from the outside as well, along with the typical jet whistling-type sound.
I have flown on many L-1011 Tristars. Wonderful aircraft. Another major factor in why it didn't sell as well is that it cost quite a bit more than the DC-10.
It was almost double the price of a DC-10 and almost as much as a 747! The RB211s weren't as powerful as the CF6 so couldn't lift as much fuel hence the shorter range.
We flew on a DC-10-30 with American Airlines from Frankfurt to JFK before connecting with another flight to SFO. This was when I was 5-1/2 years old and we were coming back from Germany after being stationed there from April 1988 until January 1992. My Mom left the Army in 1989 and my Dad retired months later in July 1992.
I flew on both types as a passenger; with the major accidents incurred by the DC10, I never felt comfortable with the aircraft. The TriStar was very comfortable and I loved the sound of those Rolls-Royce RB211 engines.
I flew on a United DC 10 in 1984 from Denver to Chicago. I was heading to Navy Boot camp at Great Lakes. After boot camp and A School I flew on another Western Air DC 10 from L.A to Honolulu to catch my ship at Pearl Harbor. The Western Air Stewardess was cool. She passed out champagne to the passengers and gave my buddies and I a couple of extra bottles. We snuck them off the plane and enjoyed them at Honolulu Airport waiting for a ride to Pearl. That was a better flight then the one heading to bootcamp.
I only had one flight on a DC-10 on a domestic flight within Canada. It was either YVR to YYZ, or YYZ to YHZ. Nice aircraft, very stable, and a smooth ride.
Douglas started development just before its merger with McDonnel but at time of first deliveries, it sold by McDonnel Douglas, but still under a DC10 name. (notw how quickly Airbus rebranded the C-Series in comparison even though aircraft deliveries had already begun). Never few L1011, but saw one being dismantled to be sent to beer can manufacturers. It had galley on cargo deck with dumwaiters to get trolleys up to main deck. (and I assume stairs for crew). This concept was seen in the movie "Excecutive Decision". The DC10 may have had more problems because it flew more and many of them were common among many aircraft that also changed their designs. But what was unique was the tail engine having access to both hydraulic systems, which 2 and 4 engined aircraft didn't have so less chance of killing both hydraulics as happened with UA232. Same for AA96 where failed cargo door caused rapid decompression of cargo area, but lack of ventilation resulted n partial buckling of main deck floor. As a result all aircraft started to incporate enough vents between main deck and cargo deck to ensure the aircraft remains structurally sound if either cargo or main deck decompress suddently.
I was in my final year of high school, back in 1980, and there was a March Break trip available to students [from Canada to London, England] that I was able to take. It was an AirCanada flight on an L-1011. Being "just a kid", I really didn't know much about planes and such, but I found the experience to be quite enjoyable and a comfortable ride.
As a little boy my first flight in an airliner was a British Caledonian DC10-30 from London Gatwick to Lagos. I got to visit the flight deck and was awe-inspired. I am now a British Airways A350 Captain. 😂
Flew 12 times on an L-1011, even did a take off in the jump seat, this plane was really comfortable, I really like it. I flewon it with Air Canada and Air Transat and in Air Transat Business class. I only flew 3 times on a DC-10, twice on Aero Mexico and once on Northwest, don't remember much from those.
We flew on a pair of Delta L-1011 planes back in June 1991 when we went on our honeymoon. One went from Atlanta via DFW to Honolulu, while the other went from Honolulu to Los Angeles.
In 1975 mum and i had a 15 day holiday to the US. The first leg of the journey was a UTA McDonald Douglas DC 8 from Sydney to Papeete. After a 3 hour wait we boarded a UTA Mc Donald Douglas DC10--30 to Las Angeles
I flew on the L-1011 many times it was my favorite widebody of the time, it was the first to receive Cat-IIIc autolanding certification, had an inertial navigation system, “direct lift control” for smooth approaches when landing, and had four independent hydraulic systems - it had a better safety record than its competitors
Flew on both, loved them both. They were both spacious. The last time I flew on the DC-10 was in 98 on American and the last L-1011 was on Eastern in 86. I never knew they didn't really need to designed a 3rd Engine , it was to get around the FAA regulation at the time.
The video doesn't portray the overall situation accurately. These aircraft wouldn't have been able to be operated at nearly the weights they were without the third engine -- basically an A300 at that point. Keep in mind that an airliner has to for example be able to take off even after one of the engines stops working just before. A widebody the size of these trying to do that on one 40,000 lb thust engine would need drastically reduced operating weights, at which point the airline loses money instead of makes money.
Travelled on the L1011 back in 1990 LGW - MCO - LGW with Caledonian Airlines, the former British Airtours. I then had a trip on the DC10 a couple of years later with United. Route was LAX - HNL - SFO - NYC (not sure if JFK or EWR). Very interesting planes.
I flew on both planes many times. Most of my L-1011 flights were domestic (U.S.), and most, but not all of my DC-10 flights were international or to/from Hawaii. They were comfortable, and I miss them.
Somewhere in an alternative universe Douglas merged with Lockheed instead of McDonnell. They would develop the “LD-10” trijet and continue the development of the dual jet “LD-11” beating the Boeing 767 in production by almost a decade.
I miss the scream of the DC-10 engines. I used to work for a charter airline and worked on DC-10s once operated by Northwest Airlines, Continental, and Lufthansa. These were great planes to travel on especially if you were a plane geek.
I still vividly recall landing in a Lockheed 1011 in Tampa Florida in 1974. I routinely made business airplane trips twice a month. The landing wasn't particularly "hard" but the L-1011 rattled like every rivet was about to pop out. It felt like the foundation of the cabin "bent" and then regained its form as the plane decelerated. My immediate reaction was "never again." I flew on the DC-10 a number of times with no incident, however, I became skeptical of it after one plane famously crashed in Chicago, also in 1974. In those days Boeing's 747 had scheduled flights, mostly coast to coast flights that took advantage of its long range. I flew in it four different times. It was interesting that those flights were generally near capacity in the economy section.
I used to fly L-1011s between Atlanta and Ft Lauderdale or West Palm Beach. Delta used to use them on those routes. At certain times of the year those routes are in high demand so using an L-1011 would be a lot more profitable than a 727 or MD-80
Product placement certainly helped McDonnell Douglas when the DC-10 featured prominently in "Home Alone." I flew aboard DC-10s several times in the late 80s and early 90s, between ORD and PDX. My only TriStar flight was a fluke. I was booked on Delta from Nice, France all the way home to PDX circa 1994. That trip included my first Airbus flight too, an A310 between JFK and Nice with a stopover in Lisbon eastbound. Anyway, my westbound Delta flight was delayed to the point that I missed my connection at JFK. Did I mention I was flying as an unaccompanied minor? Delta put me on a TWA flight to PDX with a stopover in Seattle. And yes, that TWA flight was a TriStar. Twas my favorite widebody airliner in those days, especially because it had the quietest cabin until the 787 debuted.
I have flown in both the DC-10, and L1011, plus the MD-11. I will write however, that in the case of the L1011, it was a Delta PHL-ATL morning business shuttle, and was showing it age.
I flew on LTU‘s 1011‘s several times. I always loved the experience and missed when I could not fly on the 1011 any more. IMHO a very good aircraft though only few European Airlines owned one of them. I really loved flying on them.
I flew Air New Zealand DC10s Auckland to Sydney return in the middle of 1979. I liked the DC10. In November of the same year, an Air New Zealand DC10 crashed into Mt Erebus in Antarctica killing all on board. I sometimes wonder if it was one of the planes I flew on.
I have flown on both of them, LAX-JFK TWA L-1011, LAX-DFW AA DC-10-10, LAX-IAD-LAX AA DC-10-10, LAX-GDL-LAX MX DC-10-15 all economy class 316 pax. TIJ-GDL-TIJ AM DC-10-15. I had fun flying on both the DC-10 and L-1011.
i flew the L1011 jfk to cdg with TWA and domestically through the TWA STL hub. The dc-10 from Chicago to Newark. I once flew a AA dec-10 from LaGuardia to Dallas. With the short LGA runway, the dc-10 take off was pretty zippy. Many DC-10 aircraft and their successor MD-11 aircraft became air freighters.
I flew on one DC-10 (American Airlines) and found it comfortable, but after a rough landing, a luggage door was jammed shut, so we went home without our luggage. My one flight on a Delta L-1011 was one of the best flights I ever experienced. Very smooth and quiet. One flight on each probably isn't representative, but I think the L-1011 was a more capable machine, and was more carefully assembled as well.
In the 80s Venezuela was very advanced in aviation… I flew with Viasa many times form Caracas to Frankfurt on their DC10. Lufthansa also flew the DC10 to Caracas form Frankfurt and I flew many times on their DC 10 It was an amazing airplane! I actually flew in the cockpit in the jump seat in early 90s I also flew the Tristar from Caracas to Miami with Eastern airlines
They weren’t just expensive, they were extremely costly and difficult to maintain, making it a nightmare for mechanics. So, yes, the DC-10 is better for generating profit for the airlines.
I rode a DC-10 to LAX. Leaving DFW, It seems like it would never take off. Then the nose wheel lifted and it still took a long way to take off. Same trip L1011 ,it was like a rocket
Both aircraft had similar thrust to weight ratios, so that anecdotal experience was more likely about a sudden shift in wind direction or pilot technique or derated-thrust takeoff or whatever. Like one night at Lambert Field when I watched as an L-1011 rotated and then held the pitch angle for what at least five seconds before unstick. Maybe they miscalculated Vr.
Does the MD-11 count? I flew home from Europe with KLM just before they were retired in 2014. It was my first time in business class, and I was quite impressed.
Both were very great, airplanes. They were both amazing in their own ways. While the L-1011 was technically advanced during it's time, it was a marvel of luxury and with "state of the art" technology, making it to become a terrific airplane. The DC-10 was practical in it's own way too. While these were both wide-bodies, the DC-10 saw improvements in the later years and became the "preferred" airplane for airline operations. It was the "catalyst" for being a good seller. The L-1011 came from a company that wasn't as more focused and as large as Boeing, or McDonnell Douglas, so the L-1011 program saw a later advancement with the extended range -500 series, which was to compete with the DC-10-30, and -40. However unfortunately, this airplane didn't give Lockheed a much needed boost in sales and the L-1011 program has become the only "jetliner" conceived within that company.
I flew the L1011 (first class) in 1990 to and from the UK on TWA. I also flew on a United DC-10 in 1994 from Chicago to San Francisco. I flew 3 more times on DC-10s on Northwest Airlines from 2001 to 2004 from Amsterdam to Detroit.
I had flights in both when I traveled frequently in business. I found the L1011 to have a more inviting, non claustrophobic cabin. But, I found it to be a tad noisier. I had trepidations flying in the DC10 due to its cargo door and engine mount issues. What would be the next fatal trouble spot? Yet, as I flew more and more, I developed a preference for the DC10. Ultimately, the choice was dictated by which airline served my destination. I loved both planes. I'd flown in a 747 once, twice at most. While it externally was a beautiful ship, I found the sheer volume of passenger space overwhelming and didn't care for it.
It was in the very early 2000s I flew on several KLM DC-10s (I think they called them MD-11), and I flew on a Northwest DC-10 from Frankfurt to Detroit in the same time frame.
@@johnhanson9245 MD 11 inferior to the DC 10 ? (Too small control surfaces)? Although much more modern electronic cockpit resources and flight computer?
We flew both DC 10 and Tristar L1011, the first from New York to Dubrovnik and to Belgrade several times on Yugoslav JAT Airlines and the second from Barcelona to Atlanta and on to Salt Lake city, as I recall back in 1998. iI pesonally liked L 1011 more, very elegant and sophisticated, as if it was from some future times. Beautifull aircraft indeed.
Having a single engine option did the L1011 in. the DC10 was the prettier aircraft (to me at least) but there's no denying the superior technology built into the L1011. Sad it didn't sell more units. Ironic that later on that RR engine went on to become one of the best jet engines built: the RB-211.
I believe you're right in that I think that Lockheed contracted with RR to be the exclusive engine supplier for the L-1011. To be fair, the 747 and DC-10 were also originally developed and manufactured with one available engine (747-100 - P&W, DC-10-10 - GE). I recall that Northwest Orient insisted on a P&W engine option and this would become the DC-10-40. Later, Boeing would provide the 747-300 and 747-400 models an RR engine option.
I flew from LA to Salt Lake City on one of Delta's last 727s, then from Salt Lake to San Antonio on one their last L-1011s. 1995, I believe. I remember the engine fan gearboxes growling and whining as they accelerated. It was noisier than I had surmised. Otherwise a smooth flight. Never been on a DC-10/MD-11.
There's no justice in our poor world; that's why the DC-10 was more successful. I flew on both as late as 2006/07, and boy did I like the Lockheed better. I remember flying in the dead center seat in a DC-10 as a kid and what a bummer that was. 2-5-2 seating was LOUSY. And when I lived near the airport, the plane that always rattled the windows the most was the DC-10. I was fairly comfortable flying transatlantic on the tristar several times, a couple times between Hawaii and Kuwait going the long way with multiple stops. Flying the DC-10 from Hong Kong to Dhaka was fun because Biman had such outdated planes that they were still straight out of the 70s. But my god, what a bucket of bolts.
I've flown them both on business multiple times in the 1970s and 80s and for whatever reason felt more comfortable in the DC10 even with the cargo door malfunction problem coming to light during that time period. My favorite flight was on a Lufthansa DC10 to NY from Santiago, Chile when they bumped me to first class from business and seat A1. As to that Chicago DC 10 crash, I was on the same flight a few weeks later - and that was chilling seeing the burned area as we took off. Also saw an AA DC 10 on fire at Chicago O'hare in 1986
The cargo door malfunction was: A single non-fatal accident after which McDonnell Douglas issued a Service Bulletin to modify it. One airplane that was not modified, but then found and modified before a failure. One airplane that was not modified, but the door blew out and due to a high passenger load and no floor venting (now standard in all aircraft) the floor collapsed and severed/jammed control cables causing it to crash.
I looked into this and I couldn’t find any records of an American Airlines DC-10 catching fire at O’Hare in 1986. Are you sure it wasn’t an ATA (American Trans Air) plane that caught fire?
@@KrunchKaptain You are correct - I probably had AA on my mind as that was what I was flying.. Thanks for the correction. Interesting that this never made much of any media attention outside of Chicago. It sure got mine and others as for some reason we walked right by it outside on the ramp while about 20 of us were being led to a connecting flight by an AA person. Fire apparatus were not even there yet.
@@jdwht2455Happy to help! From what I can find, the aircraft had arrived from LAX (Los Angeles) as a charter flight earlier in the day and had been having maintenance work on the aircraft when the accident happened. Apparently an oxygen generator was accidentally started in one of the forward cargo holds, causing the fire. Luckily no one was hurt. Never heard of this incident until now so I’m glad you brought it up!
@@KrunchKaptain The frightening part for me who had never been on a busy airport ramp. altho under the overhang was passing within so few feet - 50 maybe - of a burning airplane with no fire fighting apparatus there yet. Not sure the desk person was even aware until someone told her as we walked by to another gate
I flew on the L-1011 a few times between DFW and ATL when I was in college in the '70's and once from TPE via Seoul to Portland, OR. in 1988. All of the flights were operated by Delta. It was a comfortable plane even in Economy Class but that was back in the day when the airlines treated passengers decently and not like cattle as they do today. I flew on the DC-10 once from Hong Kong to Bangkok on SQ in the 80's and even though it was a pleasant flight especially with SQ's excellent on board service I honestly couldn't stop thinking of the crashes caused by mechanical failures over the previous years 😱🤣. I preferred the Tri-Star mainly because it didn’t have the unfortunate history that the DC-10 had.
I only flew a DC10-30 with Aeromexico from Orly to Madrid and the Tristar from CDG (Paris) to Mirabel Montreal with Royal . And on the BA shuttle (Tristar) from CDG to LHR before the introduction of Eurostar !
I think the L-1011 had a PR problem. Eastern Air Lines crashed one into the Everglades during its early days of service and there are lots of stories about the ghost of the pilots of that doomed plane haunting all remaining Eastern L-1011s. They supposedly warned crew members of dangerous problems, some of which turned out to be true. I flew on both (no ghosts) back in the day and found them both to be large comfortable jets. But I always regarded the Tri-Star as the better looking of the two because of its more elegant tail design.
A major reason for the DC10's success was the long range DC10-30 that quite quickly followed the domestic version into service. The DC10-30 was a huge economic success for airlines looking for something between the 707/DC8 and the 747. Lockheed's original plan was to build a completely different model for long range routes but never launched it and had to compromise by building the L1011-500 which was a shrink of the basic L1011 and was way later than the DC10-30. Also agree with Yahya 1011 comments. The L1011 was a boon for mechanics ensuring job security as it needed way to much TLC and man hours to maintain.
Flew into St Louis on a 737 and was supposed to take a puddle jumper from St Louis to South bend Indiana but had problems with the crew. We were then rerouted and put on an l 1011. Although the flight was only about 25 minutes long, it was one of the smoothest planes I had ever flown on and as somebody stated in earlier comments you couldn't tell when the plane was descending until almost touched down on the ground. La salsa nobody said anything about the fact that it was the first autonomous Air flight by a passenger jet in history. There were pilots there to take over if there was a problem but it flew on its own. It was a test flight there was no passengers aboard but the flight went flawless and it took off and flew and landed on its own with no problem!
My only 1011 experience was when I was mysteriously bumped up to 1st class on a Delta flight to Tokyo and sat next to the pilot's wife. The pilot announced on the PA system that this was the final flight ever for that plane. I just thought it was an old clunker and wished I had waited one more day so I could have flown on a new plane. Wish I had known at the time and I would have explored the plane and appreciated it.
The L-1011 was also less successful because it was a maintenance nightmare, it was very expensive and difficult to maintain, making it a mechanic's worst headache. I remember asking one of Lockheed's engineers who worked on the L-1011 why they stopped making commercial planes, since they built them so well. His response was, "We know how to make perfect commercial aircraft, but we don’t know how to make them cost-effective"
In a race between cutting edge and cutting corners technologies the most cost efficient will win.
Cost effective does not always = corner cutting, we are talking about the DC-10 however.
@@massmike11, yes, on B787 Boeing spared no expenses and it significantly outsells A330neo, although it is also noticeably more expensive. But we are talking about DC-10…
L-1011 had the most advanced avionics bar none of any airliner of its day. What you see today in a modern flight deck FMS owes a lot to the L-1011's innovations but all the gear cost a lot back in the day as this was the first commercial aircraft approved to do a Cat III autoland in zero visibility if I am not mistaken. The growth of reliability of engines and changes to ETOPs is what truly killed 3 and 4 engine jets in passenger service along with the change from international travel becoming more point to point flights in smaller jets vs fewer hub and spoke flights in larger jets. Only the longest and busiest routes can justify a B747 or A380 economically in the current market for passenger service.
Yes the TriStar is like a Mercedes Benz and the DC 10 is a Ford Taurus. Benz is a much better built car but the cost of maintenance is very very high.
I flew on both jets: American Airlines DC-10 and TWA L-1011. I found the L1011 to be just a wonderful plane. It was roomy and so stable you didn't even notice takeoffs or most turbulence, and the plane had a great safety record.
I flew on both of these many times, and I loved both planes. The automatic doors that retracted into the ceiling were very cool. First time I had seen in an airliner the lighted indicators at the front of the cabin that told you whether the lavatories were all occupied. On United’s DC-10’s you could listen to air traffic control on the headset (on “Channel 9”). In the late 1970’s I flew on an American Airlined DC-10 out of San Diego, and as a young kid I was amazed. While boarding, they were showing local TV news on the screens in the cabin. Of course, it was coming in through a TV antennae so the reception was terrible, but it seemed very cool to even able to do that at the time. Just before takeoff, the captain made an announcement and turned on a live video camera feed that was in the back of the cockpit and showed the view out of the cockpit windscreen. Again, the concept was better than the reality, as the black and white live video wasn’t very sharp and combined with the projection technology it was the furthest thing from high def. But it was so cool that they even had that feature. (That feature was quietly removed from all AA DC-10’s after the 1979 crash at ORD). Both trijets seemed to be loaded with high-tech, which really impressed me as a kid. Much cooler than the 727-200 Advanced and 737-200’s I usually flew on at the time….
I flew the 1011 once from Chicago to Hartford, Ct. I loved every minute of it. What a wonderful plane. They handed out free earphones and you could plug them into the armrest and tune to one of several channels to listen to music or the conversation berween the pilots and ATC. Naturally, I chose the latter. The flight was so smooth that even though I was listening in on the pilots, I couldn't tell that the plane was descending until the wheels actually hit the runway. Greatest flight experience I ever had.
My uncle, Owen Flynn was one of the chief engineers on the L-1011 project.
I flew on the L-1011 several times.
I don't care about cost or efficiency, all I know is that when I flew on it, the leg room was amazing and if a really fat person sat next to you, the blubber didn't fall over onto your side.
Also, the ghost of Flight 401 said there would not be another crash of an L-1011.
I believe he was right.
Hi! I am a United Airline Brat. My late "Beloved" Dad started at UAL South City in 1946. My Dad retired 32 years later as "General Foreman" in charge of maintenance / utilities for the Entire Base. Dad was an electricians mate 1st class USCG Combat South Pacific when he started. He left with 9 foremen, and 600+ mechanics as subordinates. I flew on ALL the Propliners from DC-3 Up. Flew on all the Douglas jets, and, Boeings. The L-1011 was a much nicer jet. The 10 was good too, but the L-1011 was a beautiful jet.
Keith USCG Vietnam Veteran
I flew Air Canada's L1011-1 YYZ-MIA and connected to Pan AM's L1011-500 to GIG & MVD in 1978. The fondest memory I have is seeing a Pan Am DC-10 in MIA onboard their L-1011, Pan Am had both planes! Ten years later I repeated the flight on Canadian's DC-10-30er YYZ-GIG and then boarded Varig's DC-10-30 to MVD. Varig's cabin service was top notch. 👌
The DC10s that Pan Am had were all acquired from it's merger with National Airlines in 1980!!!!! Those 10s were all ex National Airlines planes 💯💯💯💯💯
I remember flying on DC-10's with PAL from MEL-SYD-MNL back in the 80s/90s. I always liked the look of the DC-10.
Pinoy pride!!!
I prefer the Lockheed TriStar over the DC-10. In your eyes, the DC-10 was more successful because it was on the market first but it was only able to do that because McDonnell Douglas cut corners with the design and production and those decisions were big contributors to the high profile crashes that it had . ( The official reports from the National Transportation Safety Board, back this up). Success is not just measured in sales. The L1011 was a success because of the affection that many travelers had for it, even long after they've been retired. The L1011 was more comfortable and everytime I flew on one, I felt safe and knew that Lockheed had my comfort and safety in mind. There was No fear that cargo doors or engines would break off of an L1011. At time stamp 4:41, if that DC-10 was N110AA, that was the jet involved in the horrendous crash at Chicago on May 25, 1979 😢.
It also had the added benefit of gaining a stellar reputation with pilots and even maintenance crews (though generally more complicated to work on) - this definitely trickled back to the operators who enjoyed the TriStar as such.
Unfortunately, earning such a reputation didn’t really do anything for Lockheed - except perhaps for the history books and casual conversation, as they never again offered a commercial airliner. Such a shame, as I don’t ever see that changing… MD becoming Boeing and there being a complete duopoly now, even an innovative company like Lockheed would never be able to break into a market like that ever again.
The engine falling of was because AA maint crews didn’t follow the procedure required by MDD. The cargo door DID work but was complicated and if not closed properly ( training issue) could be a problem.
No engine ever fell off a DC-10 that wasn’t first crushed by a forklift improperly fitting it to the aircraft.
"cut corners with the design and production and those decisions were big contributors to the high profile crashes" So cargo door fine points and wing engine mounts tolerant of gross abuse are what would have held up production? Seems far fetched, yet people are always trying to tie the accidents to the aircraft's design supposedly having been "rushed". Mandatory 60-hour work weeks for the engineers were how it got done sooner.
Being 27, I have been lucky enough to fly on both. I flew on the northwest DC-10-30 back when I was nine and the Delta L-1011 when I was a year and a half old. I don't have any memory of flying on the L-1011, but remember all the old technology on the DC-10. I wish it was possible for the public to fly on them again.
You missed the entire actual point as to why the DC-10 outsold the TriStar. Douglas had much more experience, and planned ahead for longer range versions, and Lockheed did not. The DC-10 had a dual keel frame at the bottom of the fuselage, which allowed installing that third center gear on the DC-10-30/40 versions. Lockheed could not easily add additional landing gear, and so it could not be updated to take additional weight. Lockheed’s only option was to shorten the fuselage to create a longer range version. THAT is why the DC-10 ultimately outsold the TriStar…
You've saved me the trouble of what I usually post in DC-10/L-1011 comments sections. A few addendums:
The original DC-10-10 had a mostly-empty space underneath the floor in the middle called the Center Accessory Compartment. A few systems things were attached to the walls of it, but mostly it was a big box waiting to be filled up with a two-wheel center main landing gear someday when it was time to start building much higher weight versions. One neat thing about the CAC was how one could go from the cabin all the way down to the ground via hatches in the cabin floor and fuselage bottom.
The L-1011-500 long(er) range version did sport a very modest weight increase. They raised tire pressures as much as they could, but that came at a price in terms of airport compatibility: Higher pressure wears out the pavements faster, and airports may charge accordingly or even restrict weight (in which case you're sort of back where you started). So the main thing, as noted above, was to chop out fuselage/seats in order to gain range. Not really competitive with the DC-10 at that point, depending on an airline's routes, but at least it gave Lockheed something to sell... especially to existing 1011 operators looking to go long without switching brands.
Canadians were in a unique position as Air Canada operated the 1011 and Canadian Pacific flew the DC10. I flew on both many times and they were both outstanding aircraft.
Well, the German carrier LTU had DC10 the 1011 and the MD11 in its fleet
I did at least one flight in each of those two. I remember I really liked the DC-10 and never had that feeling anymore in another plane.
I don't know why; maybe because I was still a kid?
I never flew in a DC-10, but as a kid I flew transatlantic in an L-1011. I remember being impressed by the plane, but again I was a kid!
I was a young adult when I was on the Tristar.
My first flights were on a DC-8, I liked those flights too, but not as much as on the DC-10.
For me it was the MD11 , although i liked the 757-200 and 747-400 as well
I was in Trinidad and Tobago when the national airline, British West Indian Airlines, (B.W.I.A.) now Caribbean Airlines, got three (3) L-1011 Tri-Stars. They looked majestic in Piarco Airport. It seemed that many of the major global airlines had the Tri-Star i.e. British Airways, Air Canada, Eastern, Delta, to name a few. Also, the Tri-Star was featured in a lot of movies and television shows. I smiled when I saw it in "Die Hard 2". In the music video for Bob Marley and the Wailers' "Waiting In Vain," the 'young Bob Marley' appeared to have travelled on the British Airways Tri-Star. How I envied him!!!! I was fortunate to have flown on both the DC-10, and far more often on the Tri-Star. Both were nice, no complaints whatsoever. But I was certainly more of a fan of the Tri-Star. I knew how modern it was and, on top of all that, the top engine just seemed to be a better design. I'm sorry that the Tri-Star is gone from public service but such is progress. I can hope for the Tri-Star to make a glorious return, but alas, I too would be waiting in vain.
I only once flew on a TriStar, but it was a pretty special flight: on board one of the four KC1 aircraft operated by the RAF, on a flight to the Falkland Islands via Ascension Island. I was on my way to Antarctica.
Flew the DC-10 with PIA and The Tristar with Saudia as a child when I lived in the Middle East as an expat - both were great planes
Never knew PIA had DC-10s
@@derekcaan7686 How was the Saudia TriStar? I heard that they were very luxurious but there aren’t any videos or pictures of their interior
@@Yahya1011-1 I really enjoyed flying them - also I flew first class on them on a few occasions so my opinion may be skewed by that :)
I remember the marketing campaign of Fly Delta's Big Jets" And that I finally did when I was about 14. L1011 IAH to ORD .. I remember being amazed at the spaciousness and how cool it was to plug in my headphones and listen to Linda Ronstadt and sip a coke. Later I flew the DC10 with my Dad to LAX and we had a window seat with full view of the monster engine dangling and bouncing as rolled for take-off . (this was about a year after the AA DC10 tragedy where the engine fell off) and . We were holding our collective breaths.
I was able to fly on both aircraft several times. I preferred the L-1011.
I flew from LAX to Honolulu on an L-1011. This was right after the 1979 AA Flight 191 DC-10 Chicago crash. At that point, the FAA had grounded the DC-10. While I was over in Hawaii, it was determined the DC-10s could fly again, because the cause of the crash was improper maintenance procedures at AA. As we lined up to board our return flight, I asked the airline employee what kind of plane we would be on. The response was "a modern jet, sir" I asked a second time, same answer. So I flat out asked, "is it a DC-10?" She responded with "yes". There were audible gasps from others in the line. I was fairly certain we'd be on a DC-10, but I wanted to know. So I could make an informed decision on going or not. Obviously, the flight was fine. People in 2024 either don't remember, or are too young to know, how common it was to have US commercial aircraft crash every year. Just check the stats. The 747 has been involved in numerous fatal incidents. Killing many hundreds of people over the years. Including luggage compartment doors failing during flight, sucking passengers out of the plane to their death. And running a couple of them through the engines.
Those 60 KC-10 AF planes were in demanding service for many years. They only lost one. It was being refurbished, and was destroyed by fire, while on the ground.
I flew on a WardAir DC-10 in September 1979. The only thing I really remember about it was that it was just 4 months after the crash in Chicago, so I had that thought in the back of my mind for the entire flight.
ATA Airlines [American Trans Air] was the last airline to have a major fleet of them, and in the beautiful Vaction livery.
It would be nice to see videos on ATA, Eastern, Panam and the other airlines going over their wise and fall.
The L1011 was one amazing plane!
A family friend used to fly for ATA and he used to say the TriStar was his favorite. 2nd was the 757.
unfortunately, i never had a ride on the L1011. they were quite popular back in the days with LTU to several holiday destinations. but on the other hand, i had the oppurtinity to fly with the DC10 a couple of times with lufthansa and condor, including a beautiful landing in djerba where i was allowed to stay on the jumpseat. i love this plane! :)
although the DC10 sold more and some models are still flying in cargo capacity, the Tristar's safety record speaks volumes i feel, not perfect but it didn't suffer design failures that blew out cargo doors
Or had engines falling off.😮
The DC-10 and the l1011 were such great aircrafts I always try to book a flight making sure I had one of those aircraft
Flew L-1011's LAX to HNL on Delta in late 90's and early 2000. She started my fascination with commercial airliners.
I traveled on the L-1011 on TWA, Saudia and Gulf Air. A great comfortable aircraft. The DC-10 had a god awful 2-5-2 seating arrangement that was very uncomfortable on Continental.
The issue with tight seating configurations is that the airlines are squeezing more, narrower seats in a row as compared to when the aircraft were first placed into service. The DC-10's early economy seating configuration was 2-4-2 and there was actually a gap separating the innermost seats (though this gap was too narrow to create a third aisle). Both American and Western Airlines described that all DC-10 economy seats were in pairs. You can find early advertising images showing cutaway views of these airliners. You may also have noticed that economy seating in the Boeing 777 is now usually ten across; and not nine like it used to be.
@@tim_davidson6344 Less cramped seats at first, and a piano bar in the back with lounge seating for use during cruise on some aircraft. Hard to imagine nowadays that flying was much of anything other than a cattle car, but until demand outstripped supply there were free perks like that to attract customers.
I flew on both at some time. I believe the DC-10 was the first plane I ever flew on maybe 35 years ago. I rode an L-1011 back to Minneapolis from Las Vegas once. Great plane. What I remember most was the 5 or more restrooms lined up in back of the plane. Very comfortable experience made even more so because of only a half full flight.
It seems the pilot had to circle the airport several times because of a bad snowstorm and very poor visibility. We finally broke through the clouds though and landed with no problems. 😊
Wonderful content ❤
I felt safer on the L-1011 than the DC-10. I flew on a DC-10 from Philadelphia to Los Angeles back in 1988. I flew on an L-1011 in 1995 from Chicago to Atlanta. Even though it was on its way to being decommissioned, the L-1011 still had a way smoother flight.
The most memorable school trip in elementary school was to San Juan International in the mid 70’s. Imagine a busload of kids waltzing through security into the terminal then the boarding gate, through the air bridge and into an Eastern Airlines L-1011 for a tour of the plane! Some of us interrupted the flight attendant wanting to ask her when are we gonna take off. I thought that was the whole point of the school trip: to take a ride on the plane! But so it happened my family went on several trips to the US mainland and up until the mid 80’s they were mostly on Eastern 1011’s since that was the main airline and aircraft type flying out of SJU for domestic flights at the time
I flew on a UTA DC10 from Gaborone to Paris via Luanda in 1993.
My first wide body was a TWA L-1011 (June 1984) Also flew a Delta L-1011, and several Northwest DC-10’s throughout the 80’s and 90’s. The L-1011 is my favorite aircraft - beautiful machine!
I flew on the DC-10 a few times, all during my US Navy days. The first time I flew on it was when I left boot camp. It was mid October of 1980 aboard United Flight 225, ORD-SAN. When we were at O'Hare taxiing to the runway, the captain told us it was 32 degrees outside, and we could see snowflakes wafting around the windows. When the captain said that San Diego was checking in sunny at a balmy 74 degrees, I was elated! San Diego was my next duty station.
The flight was smooth and uneventful. One of the guys from our sister company voiced reservations about the engines falling off; this was perhaps a year after that American Airlines DC-10 had crashed after taking off from O'Hare, killing all on board. I wasn't worried about it. One, the crash had been the result of improper maintenance procedures; the crash had nothing to do with the aircraft. Two, by that point, the DC-10 had been so scrutinized that it was no doubt the safest aircraft in the air back in the early 1980s!
The flight was smooth and uneventful. From my window seat, I could see and hear the big, port side GE CF6 singing its song hour after hour during the flight. The aircraft was comfortable; they were more roomy back then vs. now. I remember being thrilled to have those headphones, so I could listen to music at my seat! I remember hearing the cult favorite, "Turning Japanese", by The Vapors. That was considered high tech, in-flight entertainment back then...
I am 58 years old, and in the early to mid 1980s, I had flown on one DC-10 on Capitol Airways from JFK to ORD, one L-1011 on Pan Am from MIA to JFK, and an Eastern L-1011 from LGA to MIA. I remember the Eastern one made quite a loud buzzing like sound on takeoff from the engines that most other aircraft types do not have. I even remember watching some take off from JFK and hearing that buzzing sound from the outside as well, along with the typical jet whistling-type sound.
Another comment is that the L-1011 was quite smooth and comfortable, the DC-10 a close second.
I have flown on many L-1011 Tristars. Wonderful aircraft. Another major factor in why it didn't sell as well is that it cost quite a bit more than the DC-10.
It was almost double the price of a DC-10 and almost as much as a 747!
The RB211s weren't as powerful as the CF6 so couldn't lift as much fuel hence the shorter range.
We flew on a DC-10-30 with American Airlines from Frankfurt to JFK before connecting with another flight to SFO. This was when I was 5-1/2 years old and we were coming back from Germany after being stationed there from April 1988 until January 1992. My Mom left the Army in 1989 and my Dad retired months later in July 1992.
I flew on both types as a passenger; with the major accidents incurred by the DC10, I never felt comfortable with the aircraft. The TriStar was very comfortable and I loved the sound of those Rolls-Royce RB211 engines.
I flew on a United DC 10 in 1984 from Denver to Chicago. I was heading to Navy Boot camp at Great Lakes. After boot camp and A School I flew on another Western Air DC 10 from L.A to Honolulu to catch my ship at Pearl Harbor. The Western Air Stewardess was cool. She passed out champagne to the passengers and gave my buddies and I a couple of extra bottles. We snuck them off the plane and enjoyed them at Honolulu Airport waiting for a ride to Pearl. That was a better flight then the one heading to bootcamp.
I only had one flight on a DC-10 on a domestic flight within Canada. It was either YVR to YYZ, or YYZ to YHZ. Nice aircraft, very stable, and a smooth ride.
Douglas started development just before its merger with McDonnel but at time of first deliveries, it sold by McDonnel Douglas, but still under a DC10 name. (notw how quickly Airbus rebranded the C-Series in comparison even though aircraft deliveries had already begun).
Never few L1011, but saw one being dismantled to be sent to beer can manufacturers. It had galley on cargo deck with dumwaiters to get trolleys up to main deck. (and I assume stairs for crew). This concept was seen in the movie "Excecutive Decision".
The DC10 may have had more problems because it flew more and many of them were common among many aircraft that also changed their designs. But what was unique was the tail engine having access to both hydraulic systems, which 2 and 4 engined aircraft didn't have so less chance of killing both hydraulics as happened with UA232. Same for AA96 where failed cargo door caused rapid decompression of cargo area, but lack of ventilation resulted n partial buckling of main deck floor. As a result all aircraft started to incporate enough vents between main deck and cargo deck to ensure the aircraft remains structurally sound if either cargo or main deck decompress suddently.
The DC-10 is my favorite plane, but I LOVE the TriStar as well :)
I was in my final year of high school, back in 1980, and there was a March Break trip available to students [from Canada to London, England] that I was able to take. It was an AirCanada flight on an L-1011. Being "just a kid", I really didn't know much about planes and such, but I found the experience to be quite enjoyable and a comfortable ride.
As a little boy my first flight in an airliner was a British Caledonian DC10-30 from London Gatwick to Lagos. I got to visit the flight deck and was awe-inspired. I am now a British Airways A350 Captain. 😂
Flew 12 times on an L-1011, even did a take off in the jump seat, this plane was really comfortable, I really like it. I flewon it with Air Canada and Air Transat and in Air Transat Business class. I only flew 3 times on a DC-10, twice on Aero Mexico and once on Northwest, don't remember much from those.
We flew on a pair of Delta L-1011 planes back in June 1991 when we went on our honeymoon. One went from Atlanta via DFW to Honolulu, while the other went from Honolulu to Los Angeles.
Traveled on the bwia tri star those were the days when you could haven gone up n see the pilots fly in cockpit golden time of traveling 😔
In 1975 mum and i had a 15 day holiday to the US. The first leg of the journey was a UTA McDonald Douglas DC 8 from Sydney to Papeete.
After a 3 hour wait we boarded a UTA Mc Donald Douglas DC10--30 to Las Angeles
I flew on the L-1011 many times it was my favorite widebody of the time, it was the first to receive Cat-IIIc autolanding certification, had an inertial navigation system, “direct lift control” for smooth approaches when landing, and had four independent hydraulic systems - it had a better safety record than its competitors
Flew on both, loved them both. They were both spacious. The last time I flew on the DC-10 was in 98 on American and the last L-1011 was on Eastern in 86. I never knew they didn't really need to designed a 3rd Engine , it was to get around the FAA regulation at the time.
The video doesn't portray the overall situation accurately. These aircraft wouldn't have been able to be operated at nearly the weights they were without the third engine -- basically an A300 at that point.
Keep in mind that an airliner has to for example be able to take off even after one of the engines stops working just before. A widebody the size of these trying to do that on one 40,000 lb thust engine would need drastically reduced operating weights, at which point the airline loses money instead of makes money.
Travelled on the L1011 back in 1990 LGW - MCO - LGW with Caledonian Airlines, the former British Airtours. I then had a trip on the DC10 a couple of years later with United. Route was LAX - HNL - SFO - NYC (not sure if JFK or EWR). Very interesting planes.
I flew on both planes many times. Most of my L-1011 flights were domestic (U.S.), and most, but not all of my DC-10 flights were international or to/from Hawaii. They were comfortable, and I miss them.
Loved flying on TWA's L1011 cross country service. I purposely avoided DC-10 after the accident in Chicago.
Somewhere in an alternative universe Douglas merged with Lockheed instead of McDonnell. They would develop the “LD-10” trijet and continue the development of the dual jet “LD-11” beating the Boeing 767 in production by almost a decade.
I was a mechanic on them with American Airlines. Grand Old Machines.
I miss the scream of the DC-10 engines. I used to work for a charter airline and worked on DC-10s once operated by Northwest Airlines, Continental, and Lufthansa. These were great planes to travel on especially if you were a plane geek.
I still vividly recall landing in a Lockheed 1011 in Tampa Florida in 1974. I routinely made business airplane trips twice a month. The landing wasn't particularly "hard" but the L-1011 rattled like every rivet was about to pop out. It felt like the foundation of the cabin "bent" and then regained its form as the plane decelerated.
My immediate reaction was "never again."
I flew on the DC-10 a number of times with no incident, however, I became skeptical of it after one plane famously crashed in Chicago, also in 1974.
In those days Boeing's 747 had scheduled flights, mostly coast to coast flights that took advantage of its long range. I flew in it four different times. It was interesting that those flights were generally near capacity in the economy section.
I used to fly L-1011s between Atlanta and Ft Lauderdale or West Palm Beach. Delta used to use them on those routes. At certain times of the year those routes are in high demand so using an L-1011 would be a lot more profitable than a 727 or MD-80
Product placement certainly helped McDonnell Douglas when the DC-10 featured prominently in "Home Alone."
I flew aboard DC-10s several times in the late 80s and early 90s, between ORD and PDX. My only TriStar flight was a fluke. I was booked on Delta from Nice, France all the way home to PDX circa 1994. That trip included my first Airbus flight too, an A310 between JFK and Nice with a stopover in Lisbon eastbound. Anyway, my westbound Delta flight was delayed to the point that I missed my connection at JFK. Did I mention I was flying as an unaccompanied minor? Delta put me on a TWA flight to PDX with a stopover in Seattle. And yes, that TWA flight was a TriStar. Twas my favorite widebody airliner in those days, especially because it had the quietest cabin until the 787 debuted.
Flew the L-1011 twice on Delta, once to Hawaii. Great flights and great airplane! I wish it or a theoretical successor was still flying.
I have flown in both the DC-10, and L1011, plus the MD-11. I will write however, that in the case of the L1011, it was a Delta PHL-ATL morning business shuttle, and was showing it age.
I flew on LTU‘s 1011‘s several times. I always loved the experience and missed when I could not fly on the 1011 any more. IMHO a very good aircraft though only few European Airlines owned one of them. I really loved flying on them.
I flew Air New Zealand DC10s Auckland to Sydney return in the middle of 1979. I liked the DC10. In November of the same year, an Air New Zealand DC10 crashed into Mt Erebus in Antarctica killing all on board. I sometimes wonder if it was one of the planes I flew on.
I have flown on both of them, LAX-JFK TWA L-1011, LAX-DFW AA DC-10-10, LAX-IAD-LAX AA DC-10-10, LAX-GDL-LAX MX DC-10-15 all economy class 316 pax. TIJ-GDL-TIJ AM DC-10-15. I had fun flying on both the DC-10 and L-1011.
Those aircraft was one of my favorites both of them
i flew the L1011 jfk to cdg with TWA and domestically through the TWA STL hub. The dc-10 from Chicago to Newark. I once flew a AA dec-10 from LaGuardia to Dallas. With the short LGA runway, the dc-10 take off was pretty zippy. Many DC-10 aircraft and their successor MD-11 aircraft became air freighters.
EL DC-10 FUE UN AVION SENCILLAMENTE ESPECTACULAR.HERMOSO ENORME IMPONENTE
I flew on one DC-10 (American Airlines) and found it comfortable, but after a rough landing, a luggage door was jammed shut, so we went home without our luggage. My one flight on a Delta L-1011 was one of the best flights I ever experienced. Very smooth and quiet.
One flight on each probably isn't representative, but I think the L-1011 was a more capable machine, and was more carefully assembled as well.
I loved the L-1011. Flew on it on Delta from ATL-BOS, ATL-MCO, SAN-LAX-ATL.
In the 80s Venezuela was very advanced in aviation… I flew with Viasa many times form Caracas to Frankfurt on their DC10.
Lufthansa also flew the DC10 to Caracas form Frankfurt and I flew many times on their DC 10
It was an amazing airplane!
I actually flew in the cockpit in the jump seat in early 90s
I also flew the Tristar from Caracas to Miami with Eastern airlines
Also L-1011 Tristar was significantly expensive. If airline would pay a little more, they could buy 747 instead.
They weren’t just expensive, they were extremely costly and difficult to maintain, making it a nightmare for mechanics. So, yes, the DC-10 is better for generating profit for the airlines.
I rode a DC-10 to LAX. Leaving DFW, It seems like it would never take off. Then the nose wheel lifted and it still took a long way to take off. Same trip L1011 ,it was like a rocket
Both aircraft had similar thrust to weight ratios, so that anecdotal experience was more likely about a sudden shift in wind direction or pilot technique or derated-thrust takeoff or whatever. Like one night at Lambert Field when I watched as an L-1011 rotated and then held the pitch angle for what at least five seconds before unstick. Maybe they miscalculated Vr.
I am not a pilot just a retired conehead and mechanic sounds good to me.
Does the MD-11 count? I flew home from Europe with KLM just before they were retired in 2014. It was my first time in business class, and I was quite impressed.
My first ever flight was on a BA tristar to Malta in the early 70's for a family holiday.
Both were very great, airplanes. They were both amazing in their own ways. While the L-1011 was technically advanced during it's time, it was a marvel of luxury and with "state of the art" technology, making it to become a terrific airplane. The DC-10 was practical in it's own way too. While these were both wide-bodies, the DC-10 saw improvements in the later years and became the "preferred" airplane for airline operations. It was the "catalyst" for being a good seller. The L-1011 came from a company that wasn't as more focused and as large as Boeing, or McDonnell Douglas, so the L-1011 program saw a later advancement with the extended range -500 series, which was to compete with the DC-10-30, and -40. However unfortunately, this airplane didn't give Lockheed a much needed boost in sales and the L-1011 program has become the only "jetliner" conceived within that company.
I flew the L1011 (first class) in 1990 to and from the UK on TWA. I also flew on a United DC-10 in 1994 from Chicago to San Francisco. I flew 3 more times on DC-10s on Northwest Airlines from 2001 to 2004 from Amsterdam to Detroit.
I had flights in both when I traveled frequently in business. I found the L1011 to have a more inviting, non claustrophobic cabin. But, I found it to be a tad noisier. I had trepidations flying in the DC10 due to its cargo door and engine mount issues. What would be the next fatal trouble spot? Yet, as I flew more and more, I developed a preference for the DC10. Ultimately, the choice was dictated by which airline served my destination. I loved both planes. I'd flown in a 747 once, twice at most. While it externally was a beautiful ship, I found the sheer volume of passenger space overwhelming and didn't care for it.
It was in the very early 2000s I flew on several KLM DC-10s (I think they called them MD-11), and I flew on a Northwest DC-10 from Frankfurt to Detroit in the same time frame.
A DC-10 and MD-11 are not the same plane. They look the same but the MD-11 came on scene later than the DC-10
@@johnhanson9245 MD 11 inferior to the DC 10 ? (Too small control surfaces)? Although much more modern electronic cockpit resources and flight computer?
We flew both DC 10 and Tristar L1011, the first from New York to Dubrovnik and to Belgrade several times on Yugoslav JAT Airlines and the second from Barcelona to Atlanta and on to Salt Lake city, as I recall back in 1998. iI pesonally liked L 1011 more, very elegant and sophisticated, as if it was from some future times. Beautifull aircraft indeed.
Having a single engine option did the L1011 in. the DC10 was the prettier aircraft (to me at least) but there's no denying the superior technology built into the L1011. Sad it didn't sell more units. Ironic that later on that RR engine went on to become one of the best jet engines built: the RB-211.
I believe you're right in that I think that Lockheed contracted with RR to be the exclusive engine supplier for the L-1011. To be fair, the 747 and DC-10 were also originally developed and manufactured with one available engine (747-100 - P&W, DC-10-10 - GE). I recall that Northwest Orient insisted on a P&W engine option and this would become the DC-10-40. Later, Boeing would provide the 747-300 and 747-400 models an RR engine option.
I worked for Delta Airlines from 1988 to 1998, and flew on the the L-1011 many times!
Flew many times on the L1011 from ATL to DFW in the early 1990s
I flew from LA to Salt Lake City on one of Delta's last 727s, then from Salt Lake to San Antonio on one their last L-1011s. 1995, I believe.
I remember the engine fan gearboxes growling and whining as they accelerated. It was noisier than I had surmised. Otherwise a smooth flight.
Never been on a DC-10/MD-11.
I filed with L1011 with Cathay Pacific l. It’s superb
Everybody wanted to travel on an L1011. I wish I could have. This generation of jet travel was the best. Shame it never could produce its potential
L-1011 was the first airplane I ever flew on. But it was a long time ago...I don't really remember much.
L1011 was fast and fun. Flew to Newark and Boston and from LA.
I flew the DC 10 from Zürich Kloten to Caracas Maiquetia and back in 1990 operated by VIASA
There's no justice in our poor world; that's why the DC-10 was more successful. I flew on both as late as 2006/07, and boy did I like the Lockheed better. I remember flying in the dead center seat in a DC-10 as a kid and what a bummer that was. 2-5-2 seating was LOUSY. And when I lived near the airport, the plane that always rattled the windows the most was the DC-10. I was fairly comfortable flying transatlantic on the tristar several times, a couple times between Hawaii and Kuwait going the long way with multiple stops. Flying the DC-10 from Hong Kong to Dhaka was fun because Biman had such outdated planes that they were still straight out of the 70s. But my god, what a bucket of bolts.
I flew on a DC 10 Air Florida back. In 1984 the airline went bankrupt and we flew back to Heathrow on Pan Am probably a 747 ,
I once flew a DC-10 from LA to Detroit, it is a very comfortable plane with power main door, vs manual door on Boeing's
I've flown them both on business multiple times in the 1970s and 80s and for whatever reason felt more comfortable in the DC10 even with the cargo door malfunction problem coming to light during that time period. My favorite flight was on a Lufthansa DC10 to NY from Santiago, Chile when they bumped me to first class from business and seat A1. As to that Chicago DC 10 crash, I was on the same flight a few weeks later - and that was chilling seeing the burned area as we took off. Also saw an AA DC 10 on fire at Chicago O'hare in 1986
The cargo door malfunction was:
A single non-fatal accident after which McDonnell Douglas issued a Service Bulletin to modify it.
One airplane that was not modified, but then found and modified before a failure.
One airplane that was not modified, but the door blew out and due to a high passenger load and no floor venting (now standard in all aircraft) the floor collapsed and severed/jammed control cables causing it to crash.
I looked into this and I couldn’t find any records of an American Airlines DC-10 catching fire at O’Hare in 1986. Are you sure it wasn’t an ATA (American Trans Air) plane that caught fire?
@@KrunchKaptain You are correct - I probably had AA on my mind as that was what I was flying.. Thanks for the correction. Interesting that this never made much of any media attention outside of Chicago. It sure got mine and others as for some reason we walked right by it outside on the ramp while about 20 of us were being led to a connecting flight by an AA person. Fire apparatus were not even there yet.
@@jdwht2455Happy to help! From what I can find, the aircraft had arrived from LAX (Los Angeles) as a charter flight earlier in the day and had been having maintenance work on the aircraft when the accident happened. Apparently an oxygen generator was accidentally started in one of the forward cargo holds, causing the fire. Luckily no one was hurt.
Never heard of this incident until now so I’m glad you brought it up!
@@KrunchKaptain The frightening part for me who had never been on a busy airport ramp. altho under the overhang was passing within so few feet - 50 maybe - of a burning airplane with no fire fighting apparatus there yet. Not sure the desk person was even aware until someone told her as we walked by to another gate
I flew on the L-1011 a few times between DFW and ATL when I was in college in the '70's and once from TPE via Seoul to Portland, OR. in 1988. All of the flights were operated by Delta. It was a comfortable plane even in Economy Class but that was back in the day when the airlines treated passengers decently and not like cattle as they do today. I flew on the DC-10 once from Hong Kong to Bangkok on SQ in the 80's and even though it was a pleasant flight especially with SQ's excellent on board service I honestly couldn't stop thinking of the crashes caused by mechanical failures over the previous years 😱🤣. I preferred the Tri-Star mainly because it didn’t have the unfortunate history that the DC-10 had.
I only flew a DC10-30 with Aeromexico from Orly to Madrid and the Tristar from CDG (Paris) to Mirabel Montreal with Royal . And on the BA shuttle (Tristar) from CDG to LHR before the introduction of Eurostar !
I was flew on L-1011 with Royal Jordanian & DC 10 with Garuda Indonesia also once with MD 11 with China Airline with Mandarin Airline livery …..
I think the L-1011 had a PR problem. Eastern Air Lines crashed one into the Everglades during its early days of service and there are lots of stories about the ghost of the pilots of that doomed plane haunting all remaining Eastern L-1011s. They supposedly warned crew members of dangerous problems, some of which turned out to be true. I flew on both (no ghosts) back in the day and found them both to be large comfortable jets. But I always regarded the Tri-Star as the better looking of the two because of its more elegant tail design.
I love the DC10
A major reason for the DC10's success was the long range DC10-30 that quite quickly followed the domestic version into service. The DC10-30 was a huge economic success for airlines looking for something between the 707/DC8 and the 747. Lockheed's original plan was to build a completely different model for long range routes but never launched it and had to compromise by building the L1011-500 which was a shrink of the basic L1011 and was way later than the DC10-30. Also agree with Yahya 1011 comments. The L1011 was a boon for mechanics ensuring job security as it needed way to much TLC and man hours to maintain.
Flew into St Louis on a 737 and was supposed to take a puddle jumper from St Louis to South bend Indiana but had problems with the crew. We were then rerouted and put on an l 1011. Although the flight was only about 25 minutes long, it was one of the smoothest planes I had ever flown on and as somebody stated in earlier comments you couldn't tell when the plane was descending until almost touched down on the ground. La salsa nobody said anything about the fact that it was the first autonomous Air flight by a passenger jet in history. There were pilots there to take over if there was a problem but it flew on its own. It was a test flight there was no passengers aboard but the flight went flawless and it took off and flew and landed on its own with no problem!
My only 1011 experience was when I was mysteriously bumped up to 1st class on a Delta flight to Tokyo and sat next to the pilot's wife. The pilot announced on the PA system that this was the final flight ever for that plane. I just thought it was an old clunker and wished I had waited one more day so I could have flown on a new plane. Wish I had known at the time and I would have explored the plane and appreciated it.