Laker Airways .... & DC-10 Project Revisions/Expansion

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

When the DC-10 entered commercial airline service during August 1971 .... in DC-10-10 form .... it was an aircraft intended to service medium range high density routes (such as Los Angeles/Chicago services in the case of AMERICAN AIRLINES) .... with a maximum range of up to 3,800 miles with a typical payload .... or some 2,300 miles range with maximum payload.

The DC-10-10 was not a long range/intercontinental aircraft .... under normal operating conditions.

London, Gatwick based LAKER AIRWAYS .... was founded as a charter airline during 1966 by British civil aviation entreprenuer Sir Freddie LAKER.

It became a "frills free" operator during the mid 1970´s .... and the DC-10-10 played a major role in the early success of the airline pioneering this class of service prior to its 1982 demise.

During the early 1970´s 5 DC-10-10´s were built by McDONNELL-DOUGLAS .... for the MITSUI GROUP of Japan .... in anticipation of what was believed to be a certain order for the type from ALL NIPPON AIRWAYS.

In a move which became as politically and commercially embarrassing as it was also unanticipated .... ANA ordered the L-1011 TRISTAR (amid later allegations of political and corporate corruption/bribary between high Japanese officials, LOCKHEED, and other US aircraft manufacturers) .... leaving MITSUI stranded with 5 DC-10-10´s it could not dispose of quickly without incurring potentially major losses.

On behalf of MITSUI .... MDC attempted to interest major and prospective operators around the world in these 5 airframes .... among which included BRITISH CALEDONIAN (as a B707 and VC-10 replacement), but, whom rejected this offer citing the range the DC-10-10 to be insufficient for its longer routes. Other operators .... including some near end of term leases were also consulted .... but .... were either not interested or reluctant to acquire new/additional aircraft (despite favorable financing terms being advanced by MITSUI whom was desperate to relinquish all 5 aircraft as quickly as possible) given the state of both the international airline industry and world economy during this period .... not to mention is own commercially and politically embarrassing entanglement in this affair.

Suddenly an idea was conceived by Terry WADDINGTON .... a British sales executive at MDC in the USA .... to the effect that LAKER AIRWAYS might jump at the opportunity to acquire DC-10´s for its charter and mooted trans-Atlantic "SKYTRAIN" services between Gatwick and New York.

It was considered a marvelous opportunity for MITSUI, MDC, and LAKER due to the DC-10´s huge potential to boost the projected profitability of an operation such as LAKER AIRWAYS.

It was analysed that the aircraft's low break-even seat factor would enable the airline to break-even operating these services at just 52% capacity .... whilst in reality actual loadings were estimated to be in excess of 70–75% throughout the first year of operations and with rapid future growth projected .... to the extent that the airline could expect to be carrying in excess of some 250,000 PAX "per year and each way".

It was also theorized that by reducing seating from 380 to 345 PAX .... and restricting PAX baggage to 40 LBS .... the DC-10-10 (with additional tanking) could accommodate sufficient additional fuel to enable non-stop flights from the UK to any point east of the US Rockies.

Such encouraging factors promptly clinched this deal firmly in favour of MTSUI, MDC, the DC-10, and LAKER AIRWAYS.

Sir Freddie was convinced by the MDC pitch .... and LAKER AIRWAYS acquired 2 of the MITSUI DC-10-10´s during November 1972 (becoming the first non-US operator of the type) for its charter services .... whilst the remaining 3 aircraft eventually went to TURKISH AIRLINES (one of which became "TC-JAV" .... the aircraft lost outside Paris during March 1974).

The airline additionally negotiated an agreement to the effect that MITSUI would buy these DC-10´s from MDC before leasing them to LAKER AIRWAYS .... whom would then finance their leases from "flying revenues only" .... meaning .... the airline would not pay for these aircraft whilst they were non-revenue-earning and thus minimizing the normal risks involved with any investment of this magnitude.

A relaxing of trans-Atlantic charter rules during 1973 saw LAKER AIRWAYS commence Gatwick/Manchester/Prestwick to Toronto charter services .... on behalf of other tourism agencies (including its own in-house ARROWSMITH HOLIDAYS division) .... and a 3rd DC-10-10 acquired during 1974 followed by the commencement of Stanstead/Newark services.

The airlines planned SKYTRAIN service .... a daily LAKER AIRWAYS London/New York schedule .... was commenced from September 1977 .... and 2 further DC-10-10´s acquired during 1978 .... followed by longer ranging DC-10-30´s during 1979 and for the airlines extended SKYTRAIN services between the UK and Los Angeles (inaugurated using B707-320B´s during the first few months of operation) .... as well as Miami services from Caribbean ports under the CARIBBEAN AIRWAYAS banner too.

Despite LAKER AIIRWAYS rapid rise to success throughout the early to mid 1970´s .... the late 1970´s, and early 1980´s, presented increasing challenges for the pioneering airline and which saw its operations being opposed by mainstream carriers whom perceived LAKER to be a threat to their own established domains.

During 1978 LAKER AIRWAYS became launch customer from the A300B-4 with an order for 10 aircraft (only 3 of which were ever delivered to the airline) .... for anticipated SKYTRAIN services to European destinations .... but which was opposed by BRITSH CALEDONIAN, BRITANNIA AIRWAYS, and DAN AIR .... although the airline did commence a short-lived Machester/Zurich service which had earlier been abandoned by BRITISH AIRWAYS.

Planned services to both Sydney and Melbourne Australia did not eventuate .... and plans to launch UK/Hong Kong services via the middle East, and from the US west coast, as part of a proposed new LAKER "GLOBALTRAIN" service, which included B747-200B´s, were also frustrated by opposition from other major operators based on their perception that LAKER´s cheap seats would flood the market to the extent of their own disadvantage. Planned UK/Chicago/Detroit/Oakland/Seattle/and Washington DC services similarly failed to eventuate also .... although even at the time of this planning these service the airline lacked the aircraft to fly these routes.

By the early 1880´s LAKER´s financial position had deteriorated .... a situation that was worsened by recessions in both the UK and USA .... and the airline was even further impacted by trans-Atlantic price war with substantial air fare reductions by BRITISH AIRWAYS, PAN AM, and TWA which even LAKER could not match .... all of which later forced the sale of the airlines A300B fleet.

It has also been suggested that LAKER´s financial security first began to be disadvantaged by concerns in regard to false and irresponsible media allegations concerning DC-10 safety following a series of major accidents to the type throughout 1979, and the associated 5-6 week grounding of these aircraft, but, which was later proven to have been (a knee jerk reaction on the part of the FAA in response to the AA DC-10 crash at Chicago during May 1979) both unnecessary and misguided .... but .... which none-the-less saw PAX loadings decline sharply among all DC-10 operators worldwide and for a considerable period following these events.

A supposedly confidential rescue package for LAKER AIRWAYS .... proposed by both MDC and GENERAL ELECTRIC .... was also exposed during this period and prompted bitter objection from BRITISH CALEDONIAN and other IATA carriers .... to such an extent that each threatened to refuse entertaining future negotiations with either corporation should such a rescue package be advanced by them and in LAKER´s favour (it was also established soon after formulating this proposed rescue package that any such contribution, to LAKER AIRWAYS, by either party, would under US law constitute part ownership in the airline by both corporations ... hardly an encouraging prospect given the magnitude of the airlines financial difficulties by this time). Consequently LAKER AIRWAYS collapsed on February 5th 1982 with debts amounting to some £270 million .... in what became the greatest failure in British corporate history at that time.

Sir Freddie LAKER sued AIR FRANCE, ALITALIA, BRITISH AIRWAYS, BRITISH CALEDONIAN, KLM, LUFTHANSA, PAN AM, SAS, SABENA, SWISSAIR, TWA, and UTA for multi-corporate conspiracy to put his airline out of business by predatory pricing practices. The airlines settled out of court and to the tune of some $US 50 million.


NOW THEN .... I RELATED THAT STORY IN ORDER TO TELL YOU THE NEXT ONE AND TO LAUNCH OUR DC-10 PROJECT EXPANSION ....


MDC technical information available to us indicates that 13 DC-10-10 airframes (only) were built, or later modified, with additional/auxiliary tanks to further increase their range. These aircraft were certified for a MGW of up to 455,000 LBS (as opposed to to 430,000 LBS for a standard DC-10-10 and 440,000 LBS for a standard DC-10-10CF) .... or akin to the weight of the DC-10-15. 4 of these aircraft were operated by LAKER AIRWAYS .... whom became the first operator to benefit from this additional tanking configuration which enabled its trans-Atlantic DC-10-10 services.

Among the HJG supplied range of current DC-10-10 textures the following (11X) subjects have each been confirmed to represent of these extended range aircraft .... and which, thanks to the genius of our George CARTY, we are now able to offer .... and for which we are going to use "unofficial" "DC-10-10ER" and "DC-10-10CF ER" aircraft type nomenclature .... simply for reasons of convenience and in order to clearly differentiate these aircraft versions from their standard DC-10-10 and -10CF aircraft counterparts which we already offer ....


DC-10-10ER

- AIR TOURS G-TAOS
- AMERICAN AIRLINES N117AA
- AMERICAN TRANS AIR N183AT
- CARIBBEAN AIRWAYS (LAKER) G-BBSZ
- LAKER AIRWAYS G-AZZD
- LAKER AIRWAYS G-BBSZ
- MY TRAVEL G-TAOS
- PREMIAIR OY-CNY
- SCANAIR SE-DHY
- SUN COUNTRY N573SC
- WESTERN AIRLINES N914WA


DC-10-10CF ER

- FED EX EXPRESS N558FE (this is a new yet unreleased texture .... slightly different from our current FED EX liveries)


George has also very cleverly worked our current 3-tank DC-10-10 and DC-10-10CF panels into 4-tank configurations especially for our new DC-10-10ER and -10CF/ER aircraft base packs. This will promote more range than the standard versions of these simulations. Range can be "even further enhanced" by reducing payload in order to accomodate additional fuel quantity .... as those whom carefully flight plan are more than likely accustomed to practicing.

Here´s few quick images of one of these new DC-10-10ER (before the term "ER" was ever officicially applied to DC-10´s) configured simulations with 1 of their supporting panel/s.

PLEASE NBOTE: The following LAKER AIRWAYS texture (by Tony MADGE) "is not" a new preview, but rather, is a currently uploaded file and which is used here simply for cosmetic purposes only .... in regard to both the above LAKER review as well previewing and pre-release flight testing each of their 2 accompanying panels and their supporting gauges/core files for the benefit of this presentation ....

















New DC-10-10ER panel .... featuring a 4-tank fuel system (extended range) configuration (F/E panel) unlike the 3-tank configuration of our standard DC-10-10´s ....

"New" DC-10-10(ER) Panel & F/E Panel with guage/night lighting illumination effect




As is evident per the above panel instrument illumination night lighting effects .... we are now re confident that the minor panel/gauge night lighting anomally (reported by only 1 person to date) has now been fixed ....

"New" DC-10-10CF(ER) Panel & F/E Panel with standard day lighting illumination effct




Each of these 2 panel also feture the same exchangeable F/O main panel fviews also .... as are a standard feature among each of our other DC-10 panels too.

Our other DC-10 project edits include ech of the following details ....


- Missing external night lighting effects will be included within new base packs.

- DC-10-10 (standard version) MGW corrected.

- Corrected DC-10-10 and DC-10-10CF (standard version) fuel capacities.

- New/edited base pack models .... featuring GMAX improvements based on the little we´ve been able to apply to thes models given the limited source code we have available to us.

- 2X "NEW" 4-tank DC-10-10ER and DC-10-10CF/ER base packs and supporting panels .... with propper flight planning these aircraft versions should be capable of simulated trans-Atlantic flights.

- Replacement panels (generally) .... with their forward left and forward right side views fixed "for FSX" .... this issue "was not" applicable to FS9/FS2004.

- Other minor main panel instrument reconfigurations .... making these panels closer to particular airline/aircraft type panel/gauge layouts.

- Fixed panel/gauge night lighting effects.

- Further edits will be applied to our online/forum based DC-10 manual in support of these edits .... where necessary.


There´s probably a bit more too, but (as tired as I am at the moment) this is all I can quickly remember.


All this is thanks entirely to the "efforts and brillance" of our very own George CARTY .... "THANKS" George

Mark C
BOG/CO

[George Carty - HJG]

Nov 3, 2018 4:03:38 GMT aerofoto - HJG Admin said:

Sir Freddie was convinced .... and LAKER acquired 2 of the MITSUI DC-10-10´s during November 1972 (becoming the first non-US operator of the type) for its charter services .... whilst the remaining 3 aircraft eventually went to TURKISH AIRLINES (one of which .... "TC-JAV" .... became the aircraft lost outside Paris during March 1974).

That got me thinking of a "what if" scenario...

TC-JAV had been manufactured incorrectly in such a way as to make its cargo door even more likely to fail than those of other DC-10s of the era: if Laker had acquired this defective aircraft instead of Turkish Airlines, would its crash have meant that the entire low-cost airline sector may have been considerably later to emerge, if indeed it had still emerged at all?

George

[Peter Liddell]

Nov 3, 2018 15:50:33 GMT George Carty - HJG said:

Nov 3, 2018 4:03:38 GMT aerofoto - HJG Admin said:

Sir Freddie was convinced .... and LAKER acquired 2 of the MITSUI DC-10-10´s during November 1972 (becoming the first non-US operator of the type) for its charter services .... whilst the remaining 3 aircraft eventually went to TURKISH AIRLINES (one of which .... "TC-JAV" .... became the aircraft lost outside Paris during March 1974).

That got me thinking of a "what if" scenario...

TC-JAV had been manufactured incorrectly in such a way as to make its cargo door even more likely to fail than those of other DC-10s of the era: if Laker had acquired this defective aircraft instead of Turkish Airlines, would its crash have meant that the entire low-cost airline sector may have been considerably later to emerge, if indeed it had still emerged at all?

George

Well if we play the what if game... if Laker had taken that frame would it of been rushed but then waited at LGB including the door switch fix because of internal THY shenanigans? And would Laker of had a non-english reading/understanding load person without training on the DC-10 shut the door at any out station without the cams being over-centered (the actual cause of the crash) and not verifying via the peep hole that they were?

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

TC-JAV had been manufactured incorrectly in such a way as to make its cargo door even more likely to fail than those of other DC-10s of the era

It wasn´t just "TC-JAV" that was affected.

"ALL" DC-10´s manufactured before the AA Windsor incident during 1972 were implicated by the port side rear fualage mail hold door locking mechanism defficiency.

It was known to both MDC and GD that this flaw existed. GD built the DC-10 fuselage barrels and conducted their own testing which revealed the problem and which they then alerted MDC to, but, which was dismissed by MDC or never adequately resolved "prior to" the DC-10´s entry to commercial service during late 1971.

It took a major incident occurring to an AA DC-10-10 (N103AA) over Windsor, Ontario, USA, during June 1972 to raise this already known issue "again" .... following which a door locking mechanism fix "was" developed by MDC .... along with number of other modifications too (floor strengthening with pressure release vents intended to prevent floor collapses, and damage to contol cables, in the even of a major decompression) .... and which were supposed to have been retrofitted to all in-service DC-10´s and applied to all new-build aircraft from 1972.

It was the catastrophic loss of some 347 lives in the TK accident (TC-JAV) outside Paris during March 1974 which then "publicly exposed" this earlier defficiency .... and the fact that some DC-10´s (abviously) hadn´t been modified as the initial investigation into this disaster promptly discovered.

It could probably be said that the FAA was equally culpable following the 1972 incident .... since they could have, and possibly should have, suspended the DC-10´s airworthiness certificate until it was proven that this defficiency had been adequately addressed and before allowing the type to continue flying .... but .... a "gentlemens agreement" was instead formulated between both MDC and the FAA, and the fix then applied voluntarily, so as to avoid potentially disadvantging the DC-10 at such a critical stage of the aircrafts early marketing.

As fixes were being applied to these aircraft from 1972 a monumental administrative blunder was made by MDC and which resulted in those DC-10-10´s produced for MITSUI, in anticipation of the ANA order (which fell in favour of L-1011´s), "not" being modified at all. 2 of these aircraft went to GK .... and the other 3 eventually went to TK .... one of which became the latters "TC-JAV" .... the aircraft lost outside Paris during 1974 and for the very same reasons the 1972 AA incident had occurred.

It´s also been reckoned that the only reason the AA incident didn´t become fatal/a hull loss is because the aircraft was flying with way less than 50% capacity at the time (the cabin floor collapse following decompression of the lower rear fuselage crimped, but did not cut, underfloor control surfaces ro the elevators, rudder, and engine 2) .... whereas the TK aircraft, due to the March 1974 BEA (I think it was) strike was "a full ship" en-route between Paris and London, and which following the decompression imposed rear fuselage floor collapse, suffered not only complñete hydraulics failure, but, also severed control cables for the elevators, ruddee, and engine 2 as well .... leaving the aircraft virtually uncontrollable.

Mark C
BOG/CO

[George Carty - HJG]

Nov 3, 2018 19:11:33 GMT aerofoto - HJG Admin said:

It wasn't just "TC-JAV" that was affected.

"ALL" DC-10 manufactured before the AA Windsor incident during 1972 were implicated by the port side rear fuselage mail hold door locking mechanism deficiency.

From Wikipedia

The Flight 981 aircraft, registration TC-JAV (also known as "Ship 29"), had been ordered from McDonnell-Douglas three months after the service bulletin was issued, and was delivered to Turkish Airlines three months later. Despite this, the changes required by the service bulletin (installation of a support plate for the handle linkage, preventing the bending of the linkage seen in the Flight 96 incident) had not been implemented. Through either oversight or deliberate fraud, the manufacturer construction logs showed that this work had been carried out. In addition, an improper adjustment had later been made to the locking pin mechanism on the Flight 981 aircraft, causing the locking pin travel to be reduced. This meant that the pins did not extend past the torque tube flanges, allowing the handle to be closed without excessive force (estimated by investigators to be around 50 pounds-force or 220 newtons) despite the improperly engaged latches. These findings concurred with statements made by Mohammed Mahmoudi, the baggage handler who had closed the door on Flight 981; he noted that no particular amount of force was needed to close the locking handle. Changes had also been made to the warning light switch mechanism, the unintended consequence of which was that the cockpit warning light would be extinguished even though the latches were not fully in place.

That's what I was getting at when I referred to this particular aircraft as especially vulnerable.

George

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

Even so ....

"ALL" of the pre-1973 produced DC-10´s were vulnerable (until modified) due to the known defficiency .... and which was the cause of the earlier/1972 AA incident as well.

The fact that the TK aircraft was never modified before delivery (along with the other originally MITSUI intended taircraft too) was probably nothing short of "an incredible/inexcuseable admimistrative blunder" on the part of MDC, but then again, the pre-1972 circumstances which allowed such a deficiency to exist at all could have, and should have, been avoided altogether and from the very beginning of the DC-10 program. This particular case is really the only (major) black mark against the DC-10´s history .... since the later 1979 concerns were all eventually proven to have been caused by departures from the recommended MDC maintenance procedures, but for which the DC-10 suffered publicly, due to erroneous and irresponsible media hype at the time, and from which it then struggled to recover thoughout the remainder of its production. It´s been said that the DC-10 was the first good aircraft to be shot down by bad press.

The TK applied modification (or whoever applied it .... and if at all) is yet another part of this sad story .... BUT .... my understansding is TC-JAV was "never" modified at all prior to the accident and which is what cased the shi-yet to hit the fan afterward.

You might enjoy/get some benefit out of the following references George ....


1. "DESTINATION DISASTER" (book) by Paul EDDIE, ELAINE POTTER, & BRUCE PAGE of the Sunday News Insight Team

2. "THE RISE AND FALL OF THE DC-10" (book) by John GODSON

3. "BEHIND CLOSED DOORS" (3X part documentary/video)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGu-rG7e1Kc

www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7XqD3m2E1E

www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoMBPPDICzM


Mark C
BOG/CO

[M.I.B.]

Fantastic news, and great background story! This project has been a constant source of joy for me ever since it was launched. So happy to see it expanding to include a small but important part of the DC-10 family. The addressing of the remaining minor imperfections is also mightily appreciated, as is everything all of you have been doing to get this digital jewel to fruition. My sincere, heartfelt thanks to the whole team!

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

"THANKS" for that Dorel .... much appreciated


It´s a pity some will remember the DC-10 only for the disasters which involved it during the 1970´s .... in particular. I´ve heard people, and media (out of "ignorance and sensationalizing" perhaps), referring to the DC-10 as a "dangerous aircraft" and even the "jinxed jet" .... whereas in reality the DC-10 actually has a safety record comparable with, if not superior to, the other wide body jetliners of its genration .... and certainly given that "human factors", rather than technical defficiencies, account for by far the majority of accidents and incidents which have involved DC-10´s throughout their more than 40 tears of opertional service. This´s despite acknowledging the existence of a pre-1990 vulnerability where extreme damage could disable all 3 hydraulic systems and leave the aircraft with little, or no, powered flight control assistance .... despite modifiations having been applied during 1974, and again during 1979. It was the unanticipated manner in which previous failues occurred that prompted at least 3 separate hydraulics system modifcations. A fail-safe modification wasn´t developed and applied until 1989. As was later proven by separate accidents and incidents, the hydraulics systems on both the A300B, and B747, were also discovered to be similarly vulnerable should such extreme damage be sustained by these aircraft also.


LIST OF DC-10 ACCIDENTS/INCIDENTS

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Accidents_and_incidents_involving_the_McDonnell_Douglas_DC-10

It should be noted that of all of the DC-10 accidents/incident that occurred, and over some 40 years of service, only 3 of these were the result of "actual aircraft failures". The rest of these were the result of "human factors" .... pilots/aircrew are only human .... like everyone else too .... and "DO" make mistakes/errors/misjudgements from which serious accidents/incidents have resulted.


Having stated that .... I now want to try´n shift focus away from the negative to the positve .... SO .... getting back to the story of LAKER AIRWAYS´ and the entrepreneurship of Sir Freddie LAKER ....



THE FREDDY LAKER STORY
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Laker


Although LAKER AIRWAYS ceased operations of February 5th 1982 this was not the end of the LAKER name in world civil aviation.

LAKER AIRWAYS/BAHAMAS was a US-registered airline established during 1992 with the assistance of Oscar WYATT (a Texas oil man and busines associate of LAKER). The airline was based at Freeport/The Bahamas .... and to which Sir Freddie LAKER lent his name and operational expertise.

LAKER AIRWAYS/BAHAMAS operated a total 8 leased B727-200 ADV´s. From its Freeport base the airlines serviced Baltimore/Maryland, Birmingham/Alabama, Chicago/Illinois, Cininatti/Nothern Kentucky, Fort Lauderdale/Florida, Greenville (Spartanburg)/South Carolina, Memphis/Tenneessee, Miami/Florida, Raleigh (Durham)/North Carolina, Richmond/Virginia, and West Palm Beach/Florida.

LAKER AIRWAYS/BAHAMAS ceased operations during 2005.

During 1996 Sir Feddie LAKER, and partner Ocar WYATT, established LAKER AIRWAYS INC (also known as "LAKER 2"). This airline commenced operations on July 5th 1996 and operated twice-weekly low-fare high quality trans-Atlantic services from Fort Lauderdale/Florida to London/Gatwick .... and later from Orlando/Florida to both Manchester/UK and Glasgow/UK using 2 leased DC-10-10 and -30 aircraft.

Although services were planned to other worldwide destinations LAKER AIRWAYS INC ceased operations during 1998.


Mark C
BOG/CO

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

As mentioned above (and a couple of times also prior to the August release of our upgraded DC-10 project) .... when we don´t have access to "the full Source Code data" for any project then we´re "limited" in regard to what we can do and achieve .... particularly in relation to features such as GMAX related wing flexing as has recently been discussed.

We have however been able to improve (slightly) the GMAX wing flexing feature within each of our "newest" (yet to be re-relesased) DC-10 models .... as each of the following static ground poses (some of our currently downloadable models do feature excessive wing dihedral and which related to GMAX) will indicate.

As each of the follwing omages should demonstrate .... the wing dihedral associated with each model is now "equal" ....


DC-10-10 (early)


DC-10-10 (late)


DC-10-10CF (early)


DC-10-10CF (late)


DC-10-10 ER (early)


DC-10-10 ER (late)


DC-10-10CF ER (late)


DC-10-15 (late)


DC-10-30 (early)


DC-10-30 (late)


DC-10-30CF/F (early)


DC-10-30CF/F (late)


DC-10-30ER


DC-10-40 (NWO/NWA)


DC-10-40D (JAL Domestic)


DC-10-40F (LGW)


DC-10-40F (HGW)


DC-10-40I (JAL International)



PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING DETAILS .... please


As also mentioned within another following our August DC-10 project release .... we´ve also been able to slightly improve the inflight GMAX wing flexing within each of our newest version DC-10 models too .... as the following "animated" image will/should demonstrate ....





I don´t want to hear anything more now in regard to this GMAX wing flexing feature .... because (for the reasons we´ve already stated) I know what we have now (that´s slotted for release/release very soon) is all/the very best we can possibly achieve given the data currently have available to us.

As listed at end of the first posting of this thread .... we´ve also applied a number of other improvements to this project .... including some corrections too .... for what will become new DC-10 aircraft base packs, panels .... and their supporting gauges/core files components too. And in addition to this we´ll also be releasing "NEW" DC-10-10(ER) and DC-10-10CF(ER) aircraft base packs and panels as well. "THIS" is unavoidable and "ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL" in regard to the success of this upgrade.

PLEASE NOTE .... it "IS NOT" possible to incorporate any such improvements, and corrections, and offer "NEW" releases too, without imposing aircraft base pack, panel, and gauges/core files replacements .... BUT .... these advances (despite any momentary inconvenience) "WILL BE" promoting of a far better/more enjoyble DC-10 simulation experience than that which we released during August .... rest assured in regard to that .... or we simply wouldn´t be doing any of this at all

Upgrading and improving is after all a part of what HJG understakes among what it offers .... "where we can of course" .... since sometimes this´s simply "IS NOT" possible at all.

We´ll be back with yet more information .... closer to the time of release/re-release.

Mark C
BOG/CO

[alex94]

Is there a chance in the future, you guys might offer the updated cockpit of the FedEx md10s? I think I’ve asked this before mark but I’m not sure what your response was. Apologies if I have..

Kind regards
Alex

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

"YES" .... you "HAVE .... and our answer remain "THE SAME"

Mark C
BOG/CO

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

"YES"

You "HAVE

And our answer still remains "THE SAME"

Let´s finish "one project at a time" .... pleasw .... whilst also remembering too what was replied, to you, some months ago, when it was stated, by us, that HJG seldom, if ever, publicly announces it´s new product intentions.

New projects/products are announced whenenm they´re completed and publicly available.

Mark C
BOG/CO

[M.I.B.]

Nov 10, 2018 20:07:48 GMT aerofoto - HJG Admin said:

We have however been able to improve (slightly) the GMAX wing flexing feature within each of our "newest" (yet to be re-relesased) DC-10 models

Eeeer, the new wing postures look way better/more accurate than before the fix! You call these "slight" improvements? Oh please, get your facts straight, mister!

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

We like to be "MODEST" Dorel .... since regardless what we to do, and how well we try to do it also, some elemets of the FS communinity relish the opportunity to complain (not you though) .... not that it bothers us though

So again .... "modesty" in the name of our game

I hope to be able reply more details during the next few days

Mark C
BOG/C

[aerofoto - HJG Admin]

A little more news concerning our updated and further improved DC-10 project.

As mentioned within my initial posting of this thread ....

In addition to other more major improvements some "minor" main panel instrument reconfiguration has also been applied and which now brings each of these panels closer to the particular airline/aircraft type panel/gauge layouts that were employed by some operators. Among these adjustments .... each of the TRC modes, when selected, will now illuminate with an "orange glow", rather than their current white illumination, as more recent research indicates this feature should display .... as follows ....

"New" TRC illumination


Other changes/improvements (minor and major) which have now been applied to this DC-10 project are listed within my initiating post of this thread .... and also demontrated (in the case of the GMAX wing flex) per my previous and subsequent posting dated "NOVEMBER 10TH 2018".

A few new DC-10 textures are also scheduled for release and as follows ....

A total of 10 DC-10-10´s were "produced" by MDC as "CF" aircraft (DC-10-10CF). 9 were delivered to CONTINENTAL AIRLINES .... and 1 (only) was delivered to UNITED AIR LINES (N1848UA, C/N 48264, L/N 269, F/F August 6th 1982) on September 20th 1982, and which was operated by the airline until October 1990 when it was sold to FED EX (N363FE "Frank")and converted to a pure freight configured DC-10-10F. In FED EX service this aircraft was upgraded to a 2-crew EFIS (MD-11 style) equipped MD-10-10F aircraft during August 2004.

UNITED AIR LINES DC-10-10CF N1848U (1989)




Other formerly PAX configured DC-10-10´s were also later converted to DC-10-10F and MD-10-10F freighters.

13 DC-10-10 airframes (only) were built, or later modified, by MDC, with auxiliary fuel tanks to further increase their range. These aircraft were certified for a MGW of up to 455,000 LBS (as opposed to to 430,000 LBS for a standard DC-10-10 and 440,000 LBS for a standard DC-10-10CF) .... or akin to the weight of the DC-10-15 and were capable of operating trans-Atltantic services from UK ports to the eastern and central USA/North America. A few of these aircraft were also later converted to DC-10-10F, and later still, upgraded MD-10-10F freighters .... and operated by FED EX ....

FED EX - EXPRESS DC-10-10F(ER)/MD-10-10F N558FE (1989)




FED EX - EXPRESS DC-10-30F/MD-10-30F N304FE (2014)




Both of the above FED EX DC-10´s feature the later FED EX titles/branding applied to these aircraft during the late 1990´s .... and both were also later converted MD-10´s as were many of the FED EX operated DC-10´s.

During the late 1980´s the DC-10-30 was also offered, by MDC, with an auxiliarly fuel tank, which promoted greater range than the standard DC-10-30, and which was then marketed as the DC-10-ER (erxtended range). Only a few factory fresh aircraft were built to this specification but a number of standard DC-10-30´s were later converted to this configuration ....

FINNAIR DC-10-30ER N345HC (1990)




"N345HC" (C/N 48265 L/N 345 F/F July 17th 1981) was originally built for EGYPT AIR but never taken up by the airline. It was instead delivereed to FINNAIR on August 11th 1981 .... leased from the FIRST BANKERS TRUST COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA .... and traded between both this company and the airline a number of times during its FINNAIR service. It was modified to "ER" specification and remained with FINNAIR until January 12th 1996 (during which time it was also sub-leased to GARUDA INSONESIA during both 1994 and 1995) .... and then sub-leased to AIR LIBERTE (F-GPVC) .... and which was merged into AIR LIB during 2001. It was sold to TRADING INVESTMENTS COPORATION on February 5th 2003, then, sold to OMNI AIR (N810AX) on December 12th 2003 after a period of storage at Paris, Orly, France, then scrapped at Victoraville, Southern California, USA, during March 2017

Mark C
BOG/CO