Good MD-10 Article

[Purpled]

'Kay...the DC-10 and MD-10 are "different". Seems FDX has boogered-up a few DC-10's too.

NWA has boogered-up zero, while operating them for a longer period of time.

Are the differences between the aircraft (DC-10, MD-10, MD-11) enough to cause problems for crews that jump between them?

Since NWA operates them extensively at night (to Europe and Asia), I don't think FDX's backside-of-the-clock ops should result in the slanted mishap record.

Dude, I don't know what your problem with us is...but this article is mostly about design flaw and structural integrity issues. It specificly points to how minor deviations made by the pilot should not have resulted in such an outcome.

Please expand on all of our DC-10 accidents, I'm tired and can't remember any of the details.

I'm sorry if we didn't hire you, one of us boned your wife, or we lost your package.

If it makes you happy-- "Northwest has the best pilots and I could only wish to stand in their shadow some day"...better?

Oh yeah, since you're Occam's Razor, then what would Occam's Razor say about multiple gear collapses in an airframe? Most obvious answer? That's right, there is a gear problem.

 

[Purpled]

lands hard on landing. .

Please allow myself to introduce myself.

Nobody wants this problem fixed more than the pilots here, it's a matter of convincing the company that having multiple maintenance/design related mishaps is a reason to change things a little bit. Seems that their answer is always more training...yeah, that helps.

 

[skiandsurf]

Subic Bay, not KL

TLH, not FLL. There was no ILS on that runway.

And man I dig this:

Sorry, my computer is acting up and it is hard to type.

So you dont deny these accidents happened. That is good. But was there really one last week in MEM runway 18R.

I also didnt mention the DC10 that burned to the ground in Stewart Newburgh, I think the cargo caught fire in flight. The crew did save that one. And I didnt mention the "hijacked" DC10 that was totaled. Surely, wasnt the crews fault, but a total hull loss none the less.

Those two were accidents, but again, did you bend one last month?

 

[Purpled]

Sorry, my computer is acting up and it is hard to type.

And that causes you to type FLL instead of TLH

So you dont deny these accidents happened.

What is this, cross-examination?

That is good. But was there really one last week in MEM runway 18R.

I also didnt mention the DC10 that burned to the ground in Stewart Newburgh, I think the cargo caught fire in flight. The crew did save that one. And I didnt mention the "hijacked" DC10 that was totaled. Surely, wasnt the crews fault, but a total hull loss none the less.

Those two were accidents, but again, did you bend one last month?

OK, you lost me on your point.

I don't think anyone here has ever denied whether or not a mishap had taken place. Of course, as always, the causal factors are disputable. The point of this thread, I think, is to highlight an article that points out that it might not be all the pilots fault every time. There might be an underlying design or maint problem that contributes to this happening.

You should welcome and embrace this string of thinking, because it is hard to come by now. Everybody wants to blame us, all the time, because it is the easiest, cheapest and gives everyone else peace or mind.

 

[skiandsurf]

but again, did you bend one last month?

Since you wont answer the question, I will assume it is true. Again, very scarey and dangerous.

 

[skiandsurf]

Since you wont answer the question, I will assume it is true. Again, very scarey and dangerous.

I did a little research......
This is a quote from a newspaper......


"Friday's accident was second in as many days to befall the company.
On Thursday, a FedEx 727 cargo plane went off an airport runway in Louisville, Ky., after the pilot aborted takeoff. Friday's accident also marked the 12th incident at Memphis International Airport involving a FedEx aircraft since 1994, according to records at the NTSB."

 

[Purpled]

Since you wont answer the question, I will assume it is true. Again, very scarey and dangerous.

Won't answer what question? It's in the stinkin article, bone head. In fact, that's what this whole freakin' discussion is about. Try and keep up with the adults here.

Scary and dangerous? Maybe. It's my a$$, not yours.

 

[Purpled]

I did a little research......
This is a quote from a newspaper......


"Friday's accident was second in as many days to befall the company.
On Thursday, a FedEx 727 cargo plane went off an airport runway in Louisville, Ky., after the pilot aborted takeoff. Friday's accident also marked the 12th incident at Memphis International Airport involving a FedEx aircraft since 1994, according to records at the NTSB."

You didn't have to go any further than http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=83320

Oh yeah, that one was mechanical failure too. Crew's back flying already, so I'm told.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

...this article is mostly about design flaw and structural integrity issues. It specificly points to how minor deviations made by the pilot should not have resulted in such an outcome.

That's where it lost it's credibility with me. According to the article, the "young F/O never quite got the drift out" and "touched down firmly"

They made it sound like it happened all the time.

Whether an actual "landing" occured or not is debatable. What is certain is that the initial touchdown happened at a vertical speed of 750/870 FPM...far in excess of the design limits, and "firm" enough to rip an otherwise servicable MLG strut the size of a tree-trunk out of the wing.

Touching down at -800 FPM might constitute (to use your words) a "minor deviation" at some companies, but at most it would be cause for a meeting with somebody from management and some time in the sim. Assuming that you are correct, and that the problem is somehow related to the airframe and not to the pilots or the training they receive, to what would you attribute the fact that only one carrier seems to be having these accidents?

This whole discussion reminds me of the day my step-daughters boyfriend totaled her Toyota. He had received several tickets for speeding in the car, but that's not what caused the accident. Nope...according to him, he was going around a corner at the normal speed, when due to some mysterious, unidentified problem both the steering AND the brakes "went out at the same time" causing him to jump a curb and take out several parked cars. I'm still waiting for Toyota to issue an emergency recall of that model...

 

[Purpled]

Whether an actual "landing" occured or not is debatable. What is certain is that the initial touchdown happened at a vertical speed of 750/870 FPM...far in excess of the design limits, and "firm" enough to rip an otherwise servicable MLG strut the size of a tree-trunk out of the wing. ...

It's late, so perhaps my eyes are failing me, but I don't see 800 fpm in the article. There is a mention of 500fpm, firm but well within structural limits (at least once). There is also mention of a hard touchdown due to windshear, but I don't see a number associated with it.

Touching down at -800 FPM might constitute (to use your words) a "minor deviation" at some companies, but at most it would be cause for a meeting with somebody from management and some time in the sim....

I never said 800fpm was a 'minor deviation.' Keep your words in your male-pleaser.

Assuming that you are correct, and that the problem is somehow related to the airframe and not to the pilots or the training they receive, to what would you attribute the fact that only one carrier seems to be having these accidents? ...

We are the only carrier flying MD-10s; and they are quite different, as the article points out, than the DC-10.

We are not the only carrier who has had MD-11 problems, see the China Air similarities to Newark.

This whole discussion reminds me of the day my step-daughters boyfriend totaled her Toyota. He had received several tickets for speeding in the car, but that's not what caused the accident. Nope...according to him, he was going around a corner at the normal speed, when due to some mysterious, unidentified problem both the steering AND the brakes "went out at the same time" causing him to jump a curb and take out several parked cars. I'm still waiting for Toyota to issue an emergency recall of that model...

Well, if those were the 'facts' of the accident then his history had nothing to do with the accident. Perhaps he isn't a good insurance risk, but if he were traveling at normal speed and the auto failed then the auto failed.

Fortunately, in aircraft, we can recover the data and will eventually find out what happened. If it turns out to be a hard landing, then it does; but if there wasn't one, then what do you propose the problem is?

Personally, I do think there is a training problem here at purple. Too much of it and not focused on the right areas. Add to this the differences that Huck pointed out earlier and you could certainly see why a mishap might occur...but probably not this many of the same type in the same airframe.