MaxKts

I believe it was flown "gear down" to Long Beach for repair

flappy

It is not a POS, far from that. But it has the fastest approach speed, right under the Concorde, and has a flight control system "delicate" to handle, very different from the DC-10.

Still one of my favorite airplanes to fly, and definitely my favorite civilian transport.

cjdriver

AIRLINE INDUSTRY INFORMATION-(C)1997-2005 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

The pilot of a FedEx cargo aircraft that caught fire after landing at the Memphis airport in December 2003 was largely responsible for the accident, the National Transportation Safety Board said Tuesday (17 May).

According to NTSB report, the pilot did not do enough to account for gusty winds and sufficiently slow the plane as it approached the airport, bringing the Boeing MD-10 slightly to the right of the runway's center line. The faulty landing overtaxed the right main landing gear, causing it to collapse, and the aircraft caught fire after veering off the runway.

At the time of the accident, the pilot was undergoing a company-mandated evaluation after deviating from an assigned altitude over England a month earlier, but according to the report the flight captain, who was evaluating the pilot, failed to adequately monitor and correct her landing.

cjdriver

Fatigued pilots' errors blamed in FedEx crash
By BILL ADAIR, Times Staff Writer
Published June 9, 2004

WASHINGTON - The crash of a FedEx plane in Tallahassee two years ago was caused by tired pilots who made critical mistakes and failed to follow runway guidance lights, the National Transportation Safety Board said Tuesday.

georgetg

both Alitalia and EVA have broken the nosewheel off MD-11 on hard touchdowns. I've seen the pix and it looks ugly...

2g+ touchdown/bounce in each case.

Alitalia was at ORD $40 mil o fix, EVA similar amount

Both stopped putting abInitio FOs in the MD11 after those incidents.

I hear the small horizontal stabilizer (almost 50% smaller than DC-10) and the pitch computer make the MD-11 twichy when it is landed from a less than stabilized approach.

There is a history of failed MLG when touchdown occurs with significant sideload on the MD-11

MD114Ever

Most of the landing problems problems at FDX have been in the MD-10. The MD-10 and MD-11 land very differently. The MD-11 will almost flare itself. You only need to help it a little to achieve a smooth and soft landing. I enjoy flying the MD-11, I feel comfortable and confident in it, and I find that most pilots, myself included, can consistently achieve smooth landings.

The MD-10 is another story. Very rarely have I witnessed what I would consider a soft landing in the MD-10. If any flight paramaters are slightly off, it is difficult to salvage a good landing in the MD-10. Add in gusty winds coupled with the different auto-throttles that the MD-10 has and you have a very delicate environment to achieve a descent landing in the MD-10. Another factor is switching from the 11 to the 10 and back. Invariably, when people land the MD-10 after flying the MD-11 the landing will be hard. Vice versa, the tendency is to flare high when landing the MD-11 after flying the MD-10.

MD11Fr8Dog

Tony, yep, you got'em right.

BTW Drew, I got a 5666 transponder code today, made me think about you for some reason!

993pilot

I agree that the MD10 is different to land as compared to the MD11. I don't believe it's difficult by any means, just different. I don't know why they don't address this in training, at least they didn't when I went through three years ago. I think it would be a smart idea to have at least one MD10-10 sim rather than two -30's.

captain_drew

GEE. .wonder why ?

Did you request a new one . . or are you a pagan . . pressing his luck?

To answer the guy who thought his question might start a 'flame war' .. I am of the opinion that most FedEx folks are constantly wandering around in a skewed circadian rhythm; Time Zone induced state of semi-conscious fatigue. The 'schedules' required of night flyers is nearly impossible for the human body to compensate away.

Having lived that type of scheduling for nearly 30 years, I was pretty sure that most of our mishaps were induced by pilot fatigue, because, by and large, we get the finest aviators, from the best pipelines and I can't generally fault the training I received. I thought, at the time, management was 'pressing the envelope' by even contemplating the conversion from a 3-seat DC-10 to a 2-seat MD-10 . . and to make it a common 'type' . . and open to the possibility that a crew would 'swap' over a Hub Turn . .or even the course of a Pairing, was insanity. In my humble opinion.

Now that I have been away for a while from staying up all night and attempting to get the FAR mandated 'crew rest' in a hotel that is 'coming awake' about the time we are trying to turn in for 'the night' . . I am absolutely convinced that the mind and body numbing schedules we are forced to keep to maintain the 'absolutley, positively' part of the equation, takes away just enough of the edge to make it a causative factor in most of the bad things that happen.

I probably would not have had near as many of the 1 on 1 'meetings' with management if I had had the opportunity to show up to fly well rested . . and not grumpy and out of sorts from a grinding fatigue. The more 'productivity' they try to wring out of you guys. . the more twisted metal we will continue to hear about.

MD11Fr8Dog

Being a good Catholic boy, I waited for a message from the Pope, upon not receiving one, we pressed on! We successfully made it to JFK and a "fun" evening in the neighborhood of the Adria!