Then Fedex better get thier act together. As per wiki, they still h ave 64 MD-11s with only 14 leaving in the next 8 years. 69 DC-10s although scheduled replacement is B767. 36 are leaving in the next 8 years.

Their MD-11 is still a flagship aircraft with only 757 and A300s beings a few more in number.

Not picking on Fedex but they still use the MD-11 frequently. Its synonymous with being on the Fedex fleet.

 

Totally different business model... FEDEX can still make money flying the MD-11. It's a lot more profitable to fly cargo than people these days... Which is why my airline is bankrupt and FEDEX makes money.

Totally different business model... FEDEX can still make money flying the MD-11. It's a lot more profitable to fly cargo than people these days... Which is why my airline is bankrupt and FEDEX makes money.

 

Sorry to hear your airline went bankrupt.

So im flying for the right virtual airline then . Fedex cargo flying md11.

When PMDG finally releases the T7, I will have a long haul passenger bird too.

Thanks, no biggie, it comes with the territory. I will say this, I had the opportunity to fly for Fedex many years ago when I left the Air Force, and not joining them was a major mistake....

But its safety record was marred more by pilot error rather than malfunctions I think.

 

As far as I can think, the only MD-11 accident that wasn't caused by human error was the Swissair 111 crash. The other issues were caused by pilots landing too hard or aggressive control inputs on that JAL MD-11 incident where a passenger died and the PIC was indicted on charges.

The 737NGX may look better and have more systems simulated but really IMO it lacks "character". I find that flying the MD-11 is always a challenge and an enjoyable experience.

People do not realize that at the time of its release the MD11 was as revolutionary as what the NGX has been at its release.

I can only imagine how frustrating this must have been for the developpers to see that the MD11 did not reach the commercial success they surely would have hoped for...

I guess that Mr. Randazzo is right when he explains this phenomenon by saying it is because you do not see this plane very often that people tend to be reluctant in buying that kind of plane, which is a sad thing really.

Thanks, no biggie, it comes with the territory. I will say this, I had the opportunity to fly for Fedex many years ago when I left the Air Force, and not joining them was a major mistake....

 

Well everyone has similar regrets, a friend of mine got an offer to work for Google way back in the days around the time when Hotmail was bought by Microsoft.

He regrets it in a similar way today, but what are you to do about it? Not much without a time machine.

 

Sadly the lack of MD-11s in the air makes it a poor seller for PMDG, also the first impression you get from the MD-11 is like a cheap japanese car which doesn't help either, but part of that reason is something you can blame on McDonnell Douglas.

Maybe the MD-11 Has faired better since the NGX release. I know maybe not quite the numbers of that bought the NGX bought the McDonnell Douglas but I'm sure people who's first aircraft was the NGX got hooked on PMDG then bought that. I know that I did after I'd bought the 747.

I'm curious about something here, so maybe someone can enlighten me (no, I don't mean take money out of my pocket to make me "lighter" :lol:). What is the main difference (broadly speaking) between the DC-10 and the MD-11? I'm assuming that both were made by McDonnell Douglas, but didn't Boeing buy out the DC-10 and 9 and rename them the MD-11 and B717? I'm asking, not suggesting in the case of the DC-10/MD-11 because I really don't know, but would be interested in finding out.

 

Thanks :smile:

According to Wikipedia: It is based on the DC-10, but featuring a stretched fuselage, increased wingspan with winglets, refined aerofoils on the wing and tailplane, new engines and increased use of composites.^[1] The winglets are credited with improving fuel efficiency by about 2.5%.^[12] The MD-11 has a smaller empennage than the DC-10 it is based upon.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_MD-11

Thanks Krister. Appreciate the info :smile: So it's still an MD though, not a Boeing, eh?

I suppose the DC-name comes from the fact that it was developed by Dougals Company before the company merged with McDonnel in 1967. DC stands for Douglas Commercial. The MD11 was developed in the late eighties -first delivery actually to "my" airline Finnair in 1990. When Boeing bought MD in 1997 they quit the MD11 production since it competed with their own T7. I guess it would have been called B-11 otherwise!

I guess it would have been called B-11 otherwise!

 

That just doesn't sound good.

 

So it's still an MD though, not a Boeing, eh

 

I've seen it referred to as the Boeing MD-11.

Hi all,

 

Interesting thread.................I have the 747V1 the 737NGX and MD11..............Out of the three the MD11 gets the most use, usually in freighter mode...............I have found the same as Pilottj that the graphics on the MD11 are not so clear as the new 737NGX but then again it runs alot better on my mid range system than the 737..............and the systems modelling on the MD11 is alot more interesting to learn about than the 737 too! Such a great plane to fly.......................The 747, well that is kind of mothballed at the minute as the MD11 is just so good that I never want to fly the 747, and doesn't actually run as well on my system as the MD11. So in my book while the 737 is undoubtedly a fantastic achievement in graphics, systems modelling and pushes the bar up again in fsx add ons, the wonderful MD11 still gets my vote.

 

One other thing someone mentioned the MD11 safety record not being very good................If anyone has the Swiss Air MD11 dvd they mention a fire in the avionics bay on one of their aircraft and they show you the thermal imagining system installed afterwards to monitor the heat in that bay on all Swiss Air MD11's.

 

Anyway, great plane developed at a time when money and economies were starting to be more important than great products......................................Not only that, but it's great to try flying something a bit different.

 

happy flying.

fire in the avionics bay

 

I need to get a life... I think that was part of the modification program Swissair initiated in 1999 or 2000. I remember reading that there were cameras/heat sensors installed in the attic above the cabin and other areas. These were supposed to give the crew an earlier indication that a fire or smoke existed.