MD-11 - the McDonnell Douglas swan song
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.พ. 2025
- McDonnell Douglas MD-11 is a three-engine wide-body airliner developed by McDonnell Douglas in the early 1990s. Technically, it is the next generation DC-10 with the application of the new engines and technical innovations.
Thank you for watching!
Subscribe to the channel, comment, like!
If you want to support Skyships and our work, welcome to our Patreon. We will create some special content for you there: / skyships
Our Facebook: / skyshipscom
As a kid I saw the new KLM dc10 arrive as they flew their approach to Schiphol practically over our backyard. I was impressed by its looks, it was so different from the dc-8! I knew most planes by heart: dc-8, 9, 10, Boeing 707, 727, 747 but also classics like the beautiful Caravelle, Vickers vc-10, Tupolev tu-104 (the noise!) and even the occasional Constellation! Compared to today it was much more interesting..
yeah today's aviation has become abit mushier and the same old same old even from a pilot's pov now this world is just twin jet dominated to me three engine's was better and the variety has truly gone down
I flew a MD11 back in 97 Delta Airlines from ATL-AMS my return flight was on the L1011
Great aircraft both, comfy and spacious
My first trip to Hawaii was on a MD11. As a kid I was tripping out because it was the biggest plane I've ever been on at that time. We watched Jurassic Park on the way there .
Just watched the Tristar and DC-10 videos so the natural progression is to this MD-11 one. Great work mate!!
Beautiful aircraft, tri-Jet love
is gtp coming Saturday?
... nothing smoother [ than lockheed tri-star ]
Just watched a UPS MD11 take off from Sydney on Saturday, mixed in with A380's, 747's, 777's and A 330's along with Q's and 737's. It certainly looks the most elegant of them all and did a rocket climb out to HNL. I expect it was only lightly loaded, and it looked beautiful powering up at about what looked like 30+ degrees angle of climb. Also saw one of the last KLM passenger take offs from SFO a few years back. Same thing, it looks graceful and powerful. Pity about the outcome for such an elegant rocket ship.
I was sitting at work watching the runway (I love planes lol) and there was a very good veriety of aircraft in rotation from tiny single engine props to an airbus a380. I noticed that the ups md11s has a drastically shorter takeoff and as you mentioned a almost vertical climb. Which I think is a result of not having passengers to keep comfortable and not necessarily weight.
@@deez26788 Possibly Deez, but I have seen them take off from HNL obviously very heavily loaded for Sydney, and they only climb at about what looks like 10 degrees at best, like they are clawing into the sky. The Sydney=HNL run is probably like many trucks, a lighter backload. They can hardly load them with iron ore or coal, about the only thing Australia exports these days, LOL. I think passengers love a powerful steep climb out, lets em know they are alive. I do at any rate!
Ahh, there's no way the DC-10 compares to a 777, sorry...
@@koolbreezeconstruction We are talking an MD 11, and the pure aesthetics Dex. Not the economics of a company that bought out it's competition, ran it into the ground and then produced the Max fiasco. 777 good for function, but MD 11 looks beautiful and a rocket ship in streamlined high AoA climb out.
We flew on Alitalias MD-11 on late 90 10 to 11 hour flight, fully load, pax and fuel, and rocketed so bad and hard that people complained about the rude takoff. POWER
I used to take the KLM's MD-11 between Montreal and Amsterdam. Those planes always felt very solidly build.
I'm...not jealous...I'm not crying... *no*
What a great video!!! I flew the MD-11 when I was in the military. World Airways was the carrier and they took great care of us. The MD-11 was a fantastic plane. Very comfortable and I always thought it was cool that you could hear the number 2 engine if you sat in the back of the plane. MD would probably still be around had they been able/willing to take the chance at creating a twin engine widebody. It would have certainly added more options for the world's airlines and their customers.
Great, I love md 11,one of my favourites. Thanks for making this video Sky!
My favorite plane ever. Love the MD-11!
Sad :( DC-10 and MD-11 are my favorite planes. I think they're gorgeous.
You and me, brother 👍
psychocuda Agree.Great planes!
you think they are gorgeous but i load these lil hoes all night long and they are a pain in the fuckin assssssssss
and you think Scair Bus are easier?
yep
I flew the MD-11F Internationally for a few years, after getting type rated up from the MD-10-30F, until the Company I was with filed Chapter 7 and I was out of a job. It was a wonderful wide body for its time and a delight to fly(when maintained correctly). I am thinking about getting my Commercial License again and being type rated to the 777-9 or 777F - after I retire next year. The Chinese are paying $30,000-$75,000/month for English-speaking Westerners to do ComPax and ComCargo Flights. Non-English Westerners with a non-discernible accent can also get into flying for them, as well.
I took Finnair´s MD11 for my first intercontinental flight in 2007 from Beijing to Helsinki, it left me with irreplaceable memory. It was not the most modern nor advanced aircraft but its unique tri-engine shape really stood out. I once had a chat with cabin crew member onboard Finnair´s newest A350 where we shake hands after knowing we´ve been both flying and witnessing the transiton from MD11 to A330/340 and to the A350 of Finnair´s.
I really miss the trijets. They had this epic, beautiful ramp presence that was just never equaled. The 747, 340 and 380 have their own, elegant look on the tarmac but the trijets had a certain “X factor”. They made you go “wow...look at that thing”. I think it was because of the number two engine on the tail. It was big, up high and super imposing. I doubt the market will ever swing that way again since engines have become so insanely reliable but hay...you never know. A new generation of trijets would be unbelievably awesome.
Imagine a tail mounted GE9X 🤣 that's something I'd love to see!
I think we're not that far away for a new trijet coming up. Theses days, manufacturers desperately try to accomodate the biggest engines possible under the wings of their two burners. With the 737 max Boeing failed miserably. They'll come back one of these days to this formula because the two burners' one is reaching its limits (the 777 X looks like a joke to me). If those engines prove too big and/or too heavy, they'll necessarily have to divide the total power amongst either 3 or 4 engines, right ? To have enough room left under them not to scratch the tarmac.
You will see them around for snow time, as it was the best aircraft, most durable airframe in its class. It got awards for structures. It has teething issues but they were solved. The 11 had winglets, a glass cockpit and a reputation for being a cadillac to fly. I enjoyed working on this aircraft. They were absolutely beautiful upon delivery.
the dc-10 will Always have a place in my memory, being the first big plane i went on when i was a small kid, going to spain...it was a Martinair one :-)
I flew YVR -> AMS on KLM's MD-11's a couple times and it was always a pleasure to fly on the MD. These have always been my favorite not just for flying on but appearance...there's just something about tri jets that I love.
Long journeys to you beautiful MD-11. May the decades to come be smooth, uneventful, and productive.
I worked at Boeing for 20 years. Military and Commercial. A-6 re-wing, Air Force 1 and 2, then 737, 747, 757, 767, 777 and last was the 787. Got laid off when they sold the Wichita division to Onyx corporation in 2005. They re-named it Spirit. That's because it's a Boeing puppet company and is the spirit of it's former self. It was fun while it lasted and I didn't want to work for Spirit anyway. Cool video. Loved the clip of the 777 inaugural flight in Boeing colors. I worked hard on that project and love that model.
I know you did the video on the 717 but it would be interesting to see a video on the MD-80 MD-90. Great videos. Really enjoying this channel.
The MD 11 actually had a flaw that the DC10 did not have.
It had a smaller tail than the DC10, which did improve range a little , BUT it caused it to need a higher landing speed than anything else, making it just more difficult to land and fly in high cross winds
I understand that this actually made the MD 11 less airworthy than the DC 10.
A significant issue.
the flight computers managed the plane handling due to the relatively smaller tail. McDonnell Douglass was too broke to redesign wings, and the tail and recycled what they had. They were rightly crowded out of the aircraft market because they couldn't keep up and innovate. ETOPS revolution and needing only 2 engines for transoceanic travel also killed the trijets and MD11, they were just too slow, too late to the market and got Boeing to buy them and then took over boeing. What they did with the DC10 is what the Douglass executives did with the 737. Stretch it, and slap engines on it, but too lazy and cheap build quality planes.
Considering the tail is always producing down lift, I fail to see how a smaller tail can directly cause a higher landing speed.
@@12345fowler Not sure if it was ONLY the tail, but it WAS a major factor
The MD11 had a higher take-off and landing speed than ANY other commercial aircraft, evne those quite a bit older and designed before there was such a thing as CAD-CAM
Nonsense, the higher speeds was due to higher weights, nothing to do with the tail. The higher the speed the better it flew and landed. I checked out as a MD11 Captain in May 1992 and retired flying it at the end of September 2012.
As always great video. Lots of information. Thumbs up.
It was heavier than the four engined A340.
A330/340 series used composites and had a smaller fuselage width. In addition A340-200 and -300 used engines that were much smaller than the turbofans used on MD11
Cool video, thanks for sharing! Current MD 11 Pilot/Inspector ;)
D W Lewis, for how long though? I’m pretty sure all airlines that still use them are phasing them out
FedEx, UPS & Western Global Airlines are planning to have them for many years to come. Lufthansa is retiring them and their birds are going to the 3 carriers I mentioned 😉
MD's KC-10 & F-15 were great aircraft. I worked on the F-15C & E when I was in the Air Force.
Lockheed L-1011 and the Boing 727 were the best Tri- Jets of all time !!
What about my hidakki LC 180-100
Or my hidakki LC 600-100
I have only been on one DC-10/MD-11 flight. It was from Guayaquil, Ecuador to Miami, Floriduh. Even though I was in a cushy first class seat it was not a pleasant experience. I'm so relieved that any chances I might of had flying in another of these inexpensively built aircraft have diminished to zero. Oh, happy day!
Very well done video - nice presentation of the information. Very much appreciated!!
Best airplane videos on YT.
History lessons with great historical footage. DC-10, MD-11 -sexy yes, but the sexiest IMO is the VC-10.
Like so many others, this was my favorite jet to ride in as well. It was spacious and absorbed turbulence better than any jet I have ever flown.
DC 8 had similar traits of absorbing turbulence so well. I very much associate planes with rides. You soon find out which airplanes are the more natural fliers.
The Boeing monopoly in the US is not good. They're becoming a bit lazy...
They can compete with the Airbus
@Joe Biden it's also a tad bit more fuel efficient
Joe Biden 777X got a new wing which cost quite a lot already, extending the fuselage, changing the insulation to make the walls thinner also isn’t free.
Afterwards they might put some effort the streamline the production of 787-8 to match 787-9 which also require resources (haven’t heard a lot about it tho)
And they will be starting 797 clean sheet design soon, doing any new design cost a ton of money.
And also comparatively Airbus currently don’t have any big design we are aware of on their hand (a321xlr is quite a small upgrade I think).
Joe Biden WRONG
The only thing that remains the same with the 777 and 777X is the airframe look. Everything else has been improved
soaringtractor How was that innovate at all!? I been on 787 and 737 MAX yet both of them gave the most horrible economy class experience with tighter seats, extremely small toilet (To the extend of unmovable) yet they flew slower than older 737 or 767. Should I be delighted on playing 787 dimmable windows? Sure! but the hype ends there. I bet you've never done plane spotting in the past because it is very exciting to see quad/tri-jets flew by with different sounds and their fuselage are hugely different, that's where the excitement of spotting is.
Very very very good videos. I Love this channel.
Enjoyed it very much, thank you!
I remember, KLM had MD11 with a asymmetric seat layout "2-4-3" before they installed seats with IFE. Am I wright?
I hear IFE and MD-11. I think Swissair 111
MrWurschtl, you are not Wright.
@@Dome31337Maybe it was in 2003.
I remember seeing a ton of these as a kid at PDX. Not so many anymore
I flew an Alitalia MD 11 in 2001. It was a GREAT aircraft. The most comfortable economy class seats I've ever experienced
*Wait, Did I Hear That Right?*
After MD delivered their last MD-12 to FINNAIR, they'd be... *"Finnish"?*
One could even say:
MD has vanished into... *"Finn air".*
*But, that'd just be pushing it.*
...so I won't.
Great Job Mate i like your Videos !!
excellent video! your content is refreshingly i former and well constructed.
L1011 was the best tri-jet, can't beat it.
Yup was the best of the Wide Bodies period. But if you were around about the time of the C-5A you would see it wasn't pretty. Lots of lost everything especially hulls.
I disagree. I like the DC10 MD10 MD11. And still flying. Proofs in the pudding.
???????, wha? DC-10 MD-11 some of the best out there. Douglas had to teach Boink how to make Wide bodies like 787 that can do vertical take off's. Started with Douglas back in 1968 with the DC-10. Poor 'Lockmart' wants anything with Douglas on it grounded without questions. But love stealing their engineering.
990a
That had automatic landing for that time was pretty impressive
Too saad that the MD-11 did not go as planned. My old neighbor back in the days flew DC-10 and MD-11, I was with him a couple times in the simulators for those near Helsinki-Vantaa airport. That was a nice experience! I also once flew from Helsinki-Vantaa to Malaga in the "jump seat", that was amazing for an aviation enthusiast as me :)
Thanks for covering so many airliners. After you've done the DC-8 and DC-9, it would be great if you cover some British jets, especially the One-eleven, Comet, the Trident tri-jet and the wonderful VC-10.
And the VC7, Brabazon and TSR-2. Much more interesting IMO.
The last DC 10 passenger service by Bangladesh Biman was in the same year, 2014. Showed the greatness of this airliner. The MD 11, I believe, had the highest approach speed of any airliner & some pilots relished flying this plane because it was such a challenge.
I got into about 30 seconds before I could not listen to your voice no longer.
I love how he has all cargo planes because those are what theses are used for now!
Always loved the DC10 and the scream of its engines!
One of the most beautiful airlines ever built!!! I miss it!!!!
Personally my favorite jet of all time
The 747sp shown (VP-BAT) sat at CYHM for quite a while. Got to see it in person a couple times as my flight taxied past :)
So then Airbus took the MD-12 design and used it towards their A380-800.
In retrospect, given the commercial issues with the A380 due to its size, it's probably for the best that the MD-12 never happened. Not that they had the money to develop it anyway, but if they did they probably would have sank even faster.
great video!!!
Nice to see Borat is doing documentaries now.
I see MD-11 freighters nearly every time I'm on an airplane taxiing to or from the runways.
At 08:10 MD11 test aircraft on takeoff roll by MDC Flight Operations Dispatch Office in Long Beach CA. I believe the aircraft was on its first test flight and on it's way to Yuma AZ. Subsequent test flights were out to W-291, south of San Diego over the Pacific Ocean. Dispatched test and production flights for MD11 MD95, C17, MD90 for 15 years.
Such a beauty
Great job sky
Love this one, the accent is back
"The description of the MD-11 design is pretty boring"...... That's proper funny mate!!🤣
Absolutely,positively great information.
Still love the 1011 more.
i have the same opinion of both, both were greats, but both are gonna fail soon :(
I remember as a kid how I thought the dc-10 was one ugly bird and I never looked forward to flying on one. However even as a little kid I could tell that the 1011 was something special. It just reeked of futuristic-ness and quality. Next to it the DC-10 seemed like a jalopy.
the best aircraf i ever seen in my life
The DC-10 the md-11 and the l-1011 was such great aircrafts I have found a DC-10 to Florida with National Airlines and the return I flew back on an l-1011 with Eastern Airlines both aircrafts were amazing they don't make plans like that anymore
British Caledonian and Air Europe ordered this plane and if not for the loss of both airlines, there would be MD-11s flying with RB211 engines!
I love MD-11 a bit. I also love the L-1011
UPS bought low hour passenger versions in 2001-2002 and had them converted to their specs with 3 cargo doors in Singapore, mainly to be used to fly to China and South America. They've been a good deal, and they got a deal.
I think that if the problem of the blowing off cargo doors issue had been addressed aggressively when it first became known to management and/or engineering McDonald Douglas would still be around today.
I understand that other plane brands have had incidents of non-plug style cargo doors that blew off causing explosive decompressions but that due to more robust routing of cables and hydraulic lines those planes were able to be brought back to controlled emergency landings.
Hi Dj, I learned something new, thanks! ...... Being that aircraft are in service for as long as a quarter to a third of ones life times they can always use an old, new world trick when it comes to naming their planes. When AirBus finally uses lets say, all of the "390" series in the future, they can just introduce the "NEW A-300". Or both AirBus and Boeing can replace the word, "HUNDRED" for the word "THOUSAND." I look at company's branding the same way I look at "Life time waranties." ..... "Whose' life time, minds, or the company's?" ;)
I love the fact a lot of the footage is PDX
ahhhh… world airlines good memories going to the desert and back
I like that all the L10-11 footage is from the 'Langoliers' TV Movie :-)
One of the greatest looking aircraft of all time. Shame it wasn’t more popular.
Mcdonnell Douglas should have made a middle of the market plane (like B737, A320) since they're the most sold planes.
This could fund new wide body projects, which tend to be expensive.
They could have made something bigger than DC9 (which is only good for regional) and smaller than DC10/MD11.
At the time in 1990's the middle of the market was not a big market, the Boeing 757 didn't make it... Mcdonnell Douglas had to develop the A330 or 767 like model or make a very large trijet
Well, if you want a 737 or 320 competitor, they had it. Md 82, 83, 90 were just that. although sounding much better they were gas guzzlers and basically that killed them
The positioning of the engines on the fuselage made it harder to replace the engines with high bypass turbofans, the CFM56 may have been available from 1974, but was too big to fit on an MD90 variant. The BR710 engine (B717) wasn't available till 1998.
"I'm Joe Shoemaker of the BBC and I'm here with William Brewster, chief of the National Transportation Board Accident Investigation team and he has a news update for us:"
[he handed the microphone to the stout fellow beside him]
"The Accident Investigation team and I have been here since midnight last night and I have some fresh statistics for everybody. A lightplane, a Cessna 172, crashed in this cemetary here at Brimshireford just south of Hampton and we've discovered 278 bodies and we're still digging. This investigation may take several weeks."
[he hands the microphone back to the first fellow]
"Back to you in London, Pat."
It is my favorite big Airliner .
Lockheed needs to get back into the commercial market. Having only one commercial actual domestic builder is obviously causing issues
MDC could have saved the MD-11 if it was more manageable. If the MD-11/ER had met design specifications + better crosswind performance since 1st commercial flight, it would have instantly killed the A340-200. Even better, during that time engines were already powerful enough to propel very large twinjets (777) , so MDC could have simply placed all their resources in removing the 3rd engine from the DC-10 to make a competitor to the A330/767-400ER and a stretched version to compete with the 777 and A340.
I know, they did preliminary research into a twin jet dc-10 as early as the late 70's but didn't go thru with it, by the mid 80's it should have been obvious that twin jets were the future.
Coulda woulda shoulda. Bottom line is MDC simply wasn't financially equipped to tweak the MD11 any further than the original quise. The baseline MD11 itself was already austerely based on a minimum changed DC10. MDC was just barely scraping by. Airbus and Boeing were killing MDC with their much bigger and fuller product ranges. Too little revenue flowed into MDC to fund further refinements of the MD11.
ETOPS 180 wasn't possible till 1990. But at that point, the Twin was the money maker.
As ETOPS continue to grow in numbers, the DC-10/MD-11/a340s were as in the same class as the 777 were the it came into service mid-1990s and completely destroyed the entire argument with these multi-engined airlines in The whole widebody competition, wiping out all these inefficient planes, even its own 747s. It’s order started to grown and grow significantly and very quickl, that’s why the a330 was even once a more popular choice over its four engined a340 brother because twinsjets started to show their reliability, but none achieved been such popular like 777. Who continues to go strong
trent8002003 MDC may not have enough funds for a clean sheet design but they had enough funds for the twin DC-10. For example, the R and D funds used to redesign of the cowling and nacelle of engine no. 2 was almost the same as completely removing it from the plane.
The MD-11 is also the largest airliner ever sold by McDonnell Douglas.
My favourite plane ever !!!
The most sexy airliner of all time
Wonder Why they were Discontinued...???
Excellent production. I'm amazed that McConnell Douglas stayed with the three engined concept when it was surely obvious that the 747 and Airbus models were blowing them out of the air.
that is......when the DC-10s and MD-11s werent blowing themselves out of the air anyway
Ben Farrell The MD-11 was relatively safer if handled properly.
@@jacobnathanielzpayag3885 it had its share of crashes though, I think 20-25 of the 200 built have already crashed
Ben Farrell 30 to be exact. Al least it was not blowing its doors open (unlike the DC-10 with 2 cargo door blowouts, 747 with 1 cargo door blowout)
@@jacobnathanielzpayag3885 Sky did mention that they had alot of issues with training pilots for desired efficiency, maybe that could have been a factor in the high amount of crashes
Thank you!
I remember as a kid how I thought the dc-10 was one ugly bird and I never looked forward to flying on one. The Lockheed was another story. Even as a little kid I could tell that the 1011 was something special. It just oozed futuristic-ness and quality. Next to it the DC-10 seemed like a jalopy.
And yet no one operates L-1011s anymore, but some DC-10 and MD-11 aircraft are still in use, at least for a while longer.
That is a very nice plane.
Absolutely positively my favourite of all. Had a lot of experience working both aircraft ( mostly -10s with CP). After they worked it the initial problems in the design thus airplane has became one of most reliable minus higher fuel consumption. I know of CPs birds having and amazing dispatch reliability.
It was timing that hurt the MD. Between Finnair’s actual start of operations, that gave it only s 4 year lead on United’s 777.
They should have also kept the horizontal stab.elevator assy. To a larger size. This reduction made it inherently unstable upon short final and flare and hence reduced pitch response.
Overall both amazing airplanes, and definitely very good as freighters. This is a drop dead gorgeous airplane
Such a beautiful and capable aircraft. I miss the trijet in this new reality of twin engine air travel.
I worked on the MD11’s wire harnesses, it was a great place to work. Sadly we lost our jobs to foreign competition Airbus (State subsidized by the EU)
If I had a choice in the future. I'd make a company and build the md11 but with name and look changes
And with no orders
@@dododakowski2813 how do you know? Were not in the future yet
@@darkchaotix1productions326 Because the Trijets failed, because of the B787's success
@@dododakowski2813 but you dont even know what i,d do to it why don't our be you, and I'll be me
How are you so sure that it would sell?
Still looks cool as hell.
RIP md11, you will be missed, 🙁.
You can still fly if you mail yourself
MD-11s are everywhere in the world today, but only as freighters.
Yep, but they are slowly dying out :(
I agree the DC-9, DC 10 and MD11 are great aircraft.
Still the most beautiful (yes, even sexy) aircraft ever built, IMO. :)
Молодец Скай!
Расширяй аудиторию...))))
The problem with DC-10 and L-1011 is that they were designed under the constraint that twin-engine operation was still somewhat risky and therefore restricted by certification authorities. Three engines was OK for the long over-water routes.
ETOPS is what killed these tri-jets. Once you could, for example, fly LAX-HNL with two engines rather than three, the outcome was obvious.
The same is true for the 747. It used to be that four engines were required for long-haul routes. The requirement was actually more-than-two. In the days of propellor-driven planes no-one wanted another Ford Tri-Motor look-alike so four piston engines became the obvious standard. And remained so until Boeing created the 727, although not exactly a long-haul airplane. The L-1011 and DC-10 were obvious cribs of that design, but Douglas bungled it by sticking the third engine through the rudder rather than putting it in the fuselage (harder design) as Lockheed did.
I could go on but the unavoidable fact is that Douglas (and then McD-D) did a bad, rushed design.
The DC-10 was said to be a pilots aircraft; a docile bird that was easy to fly in all weather conditions. The MD-11 was a very different story. It seems that MD pushed things too far in order to squeeze out every once of performance. The MD-11 probably had the highest landing speeds of a subsonic airliner. To add to this challenge , pilots also had to take special precautions with "bounced" landings and resist the their natural instinct of simply pushing the nose down. There were a few incidents where the pilot tried to force the nose down, in response to a bounce, causing a catastrophic wing failure and the whole aircraft rolling upside down in a fireball. The high landing speeds were indeed due to the the smaller horizontal tail surfaces designed to reduce drag. An aggressive weight savings program resulting in wings that refused to stay attached on hard landings.
What's the name of the song in the background toward the end? The next to last song.
If it does not have winglets and a noticeably long fuselage and small V Stab. it is not an MD11. You can call those MD10s and they have variations out there, they are DC 10s converted to modern avionics. MD11s have a visual giveaway/cue and that is the winglets.
Interesting theory. If Douglas had chosen to make a two engine wide body instead of the DC-10, would Lockheed still be in the civil aviation industry?
seen daily arriving and departing Stansted airport , Fed ex MD11
Not sure how you got the Northern 747-8i PNG but the video looked nice.