@@pegleg2959 The combination of two things: the apparent width of the strip is too small for a major aircraft, and the black and white stripes suggest the humorous alternative of a crossing lane for black and white striped zebras.
Such an unmistakable sound the huge trijets made… I’d recognize that sound anywhere. Sad to see so few left, but understandable. Always happy when I get to see a FedEx MD-10 or MD-11 at my airport.
@Dan Jackson, no it wasn’t. It just wasn’t as lucky as the L-1011. The L-1011 had a triple engine failure but luckily didn’t crash. The DC-10 had no such incident. Shrapnel impacted every one of the L-1011s four hydraulic systems after a centre engine fan explosion. Only luck kept one system intact. The L-1011s stabilizer jammed in the full nose up position. Never happened to a DC-10. Only luck kept it from crashing. The L-1011 was late into service, not very many were made, it was a maintenance nightmare, production ended early, and they were retired early. It only flew a fraction of the hours the DC-10 did. The TU-114 was “safer” than the L-1011 for the same reasons. The L-1011 couldn’t even be certified in its original form due to engines that would explode on impact with birds.
I do know that once Boeing got US government approval for flying across oceans with twin engine aircraft, the end of the three engine jet was eminent. 777 twin engines flew to Hawaii and approval was given.
Did Boeing get it before Airbus? I thought they got it first, so that meant Boeing would get it as well soon and others likewise and so no need for 3 engines.
My son is 2.5 and shows an absolute interest on airplanes and especially really big planes. His favorite thing to do is just going to the airport and watch planes takeoff and land. I absolutely hope your channel is still around when he’s a bit older to inspire him to follow the aviation industry. Thanks for what you do!
Honda Ridgeline Wow! I wish I could get my son to do that with me! I'm like your son, always looking at airplanes overhead. One day, two airliners overhead appeared to be racing each other, almost side by side at 30-something thousand feet. I said Look at those jets, they're racing! He looked up and said, Dad airplanes are boring. My soul was crushed, lol!!! I still make he go plane spotting with me sometimes but he doesn't get as excited as I do. Enjoy your time with your son!
I miss that S duct sweep. The look was akin to an F1 car, and the fact there was a tunnel running that deep in the fuselage, just blew my mind. To this day that tail still represents the magic of airtravel for me.
Did you know that back in the early '70s Boeing had plans to develop a trijet version of the 747 with a shorter fuselage? A major redesign of the wings would have been necessary and it would have much different handling characteristics, so Boeing instead decided to develop a shorter 747 that still had four engines, resulting in the 747SP.
that trijet version of the 747 (known as the 300 before the real big hump 300 later on) has always been a big what if to me on one hand i think it would have done very well due to timing size and economics but on the other hand due to market crowding and fuel and pax numbers etc at the time i have a feeling it would have tanked
My grandfather flew for Delta for 27 years and during his time, they rented some DC-10s before taking delivery on their L-1011s. When I asked him which he enjoyed flying more, he said that the DC-10 was a better handling airplane and responded quicker to pilot input, but that the L-1011 was so much more advanced and so much more refined that he was glad his later career saw him in the Lockheed. His all-time favorite airliner to fly, however, was the Convair 880. He really liked that plane.
For over 40 years I have flown extensively, and many flights were on DC10s, L1011s. Between the two, I found the DC10 to be the quieter of the two. I also thought it looked better. Specifically, American. Delta, TWA and Eastern flew L1011s. I mainly traveled on Delta, but occasionally, TWA and Eastern. I was a Road Warrior for 17 years. From the late 80s up until mid 2000s. Love everything about commercial aviation, and thankful for RUclips!
Maybe, if there's ever gonna be any demand for a really huge aircraft with a capacity of 400-500 passengers again, i.e. something like the 747 or the A380, that's where Tri-Jets might come back again in the future. Because, let‘s face it: Three engines are still more efficient than four. Imagine an airliner with three GE90s ... that'd be a beast! 😁
I often go YVR airport to watch planes and really miss seeing the DC-10's and MD-11's landing and taking off. When a DC-10 is taxiing directly toward you, the high pitched shriek coming from the mid engine's intake tube is truly awesome. Plus the mid engine looks so much larger than it really is, and makes the plane look very powerful.
Back in the day, I flew a lot back and forth to college. Mostly, I flew in 737s. Hated them. Like flying in a sardine can that got buffeted around by kids playing kick the can. Only flew once in a jumbo jet, an L-1011. Like flying in your living room. I was actually listening to the pilots talking to the ATC during the descent, but it was so smooth, that I didn't realize we were descending until the tires hit the runway and I am not exaggerating. What a great experience! Beautiful plane!
I loved the 727. Gorgeous airplane. Everybody moved too close to airports and then started complaining. So no more 727 hot rods. The best airline flight also included the best airline meal I ever had. If you are young, they really used to serve full meals with metal silverware and everything. But, I digress. It was an L-1011 TriStar. Smooth and quiet. Plus it looked sexy. Great curves...including the S-duct. Mmmmm. I always hated the looks of the DC-10. The third engine always looked like an afterthought to me. Like they were too lazy to do it right so they just slapped it up top in the vertical stabilizer. My second best passenger flight experience was in a C-5 Galaxy. Smooth and quiet except for hearing the flap and gear motors. But I liked that. Ironically, that was the second best meal I’ve ever been served on an airplane. We were heading off to the Gulf War. I appreciated the meal tremendously. The only draw back to the C-5? There’s no “people eaters” or gates at Dover. To get to the rearward facing passenger compartment a climb up a steep ~14 foot ladder is required. Not easy, or stabile with 60+ pounds on your back. To this day and hundreds of airline flights later. It’s the only airplane where I could not feel when we actually landed. I heard the power reduction for descent. Heard the flap motor and gear doors open and the gear clunk into down and locked position...and then we were taxiing. Amazing. Still amazing to think about that today. Another memory from that time long ago was arriving at Dover and as far as he eye could see were parked C-5s being loaded or unloaded or fueled. And these were all on the ground in Dover. Imagine how many were inbound or outbound from Europe and the ME. And on the ground overseas. I was an airplane buff but my jaw dropped when I saw how many C-5s were on the ground in Dover. Still in awe at the military power projection that represented.
I was working for Rolls-Royce in the late 60s when the first RB211 3 shaft gas turbines were being designed and developed. The first aircraft they were intended to be used on were the Lockheed L1011 so tri-jets were certainly being more than thought about before the 1970s as mentioned here. I left RR just before the 'crash' in 1970 caused by the design problems with carbon fibre fan blades and the extra cost in using titanium (which is now standard). I rejoined RR a few years later and remained until retirement but, as I recall, one of the problem with centre engine was that S shaped intake duct which meant air intake was inevitably restricted. My field was the design of electronic measurement and control systems on test beds and rigs so the details of aerodynamic design were almost as much a mystery to me as to the general public :) Like all your videos, very well presented and explained. Thanks
@@MentourPilot bi engine jets can counter rotate engines which increase the stability... Then how does trijets manage to stabilize the flight... And can maneuver 🤔
Great to see all the appreciation for the beautiful L-1011 Tristar. I am putting in a shout for the Tu-154, a handsome beast of a plane, ruggedly built to cope with terrible runways and could sing too! 🛩 💜
As kid, watching that 3rd engine standing above, and with the loud sound from the old turbojets... Gotta admit I was scared about them 😂🤣 Now, the design and sound, is so nostalgic 😢
+therealnightwriter Unless you designed the rear fuselage with some extra space to begin with... I do agree that a modern high bypass-ratio turbofan engine would be very difficult to to retro-fit due to their size, but with fuel-efficiency a priority these days, I could see three engines used for take-off & climb to altitude (and remember, there are many airports that require pretty steep climb angles to minimize noise or clear terrain), and then shutting down the third engine (if you had retractable intake ducts to eliminate drag) for a very fuel-efficient cruise on the two main engines- it would also increase the T.B.O. of the third engine, saving on maintenance costs. Any aircraft manufacturers/designers who read this, please feel free to send me obscene amounts of money and use my idea!
Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim :) There's a more in-depth explanation into ETOPS at the Wendover Productions channel, which mentions that ETOPS is not just about the aircraft landing safely to the nearest airport but also consists of airlines having a plan to accommodate the passengers at the unexpected location.
I loved flying in the DC10. I flew in them when Sir Freddie Laker had the Skytrain service. When the engine fell off the wing of that DC10 in Chicago - a month before my flight to California, the aircraft was changed to a 707 and later a Tristar.
The TriStar was a wonderful airliner for it's time. Pilots loved to fly the shorter/higher performance -500 series. The RB211's were a little finicky in hot and high airports and thus earned the nickname "Tri To Starts". PSA even outfitted theirs with a lounge in the "basement" (vs a galley) for the LAX to SFO run. L10111's were truly ahead of their time with Cat 3 autoland capability.
I love your vids. I worked on A7-A Navy attack aircraft in the early / mid 1970's . AQ-2. More of a Radar / Weapons release electronics Tech.. I loved being on the flight line. Every time I go to an airport and smell JP-5 fumes, it reminds me of my days on the flight line.. Thank you.
Good stuff, mate ! Keep going ! However, on your array of tri-jets examples you forgot to mention the Boeing 727...!!! By far, the fastest of all commercial tri-jets is the Tupolev Tu-154.
One disadvantage of the DC-10/MD-11 arrangement, with the engine atop the fuselage rather than behind it, is that the engine took up space on the fin which would have otherwise been part of the rudder. Looking at the L-1011 you can see that the Tristar had a full-length rudder while the one on the DC- 10 is much smaller.
I flew on both the DC10 and the L1011. I don't think I have ever flown on a more comfortable, quiet and roomy airplane than the Tri-Star. I really loved to fly on that plane and I'm somewhat of a "white-knuckled" flyer. What I really thought rather impressive was the below deck galley and the elevator that was used by the flight attendants to bring meals (now there is a piece of pleasurable memorabilia) from the below deck galley area to the passengers deck.
Always loved flying on Deltas L1011s Smoothest ride outside a 747.The L1011s used to come over the Navy base in San Diego where i was stationed like the 727s much quieter than those damn Dc9s or 737s. Thanks for the video.Thomas Fritz
my dad flew the DC10, i absolutely love them ! P.S. your content is a gold mine. just like how the courses in the app are wonderful and so helpful. i'm currently doing my type rating on the 777 and feel like i'm in heaven !! Keep on going the great work Mentour !!!
Never flew in a trijet before. Growing up in Southeast Asia, my parents took me on plenty of trips in the 747 until I was 12. Then I spent 20 years in North America until I returned to Asia for an interview. That was my first time seeing the 777-300ER being towed to the gate I was at. Just thinking about its engines was mind blowing. The fan diameter was larger than that of a 737 fuselage. It produces more power than a container ship engine. And just one of those has to take such a huge airplane with a full load of passengers and fuel to the sky (after V1 that is).
I´m one of very few Norwegians that have worked as cabin crew on Lockheed 1011 TriStar. That since TriStar never was used by SAS and any other Norwegian airlines. I worked for Air OPS.
Yes. The airplane is certified with 3 engines (all the "normal/non-emergency" specifications such as landing speed, stall speed, landing distance, takeoff distance, V speeds etc are calculated based on 3 engines working), you can't just decide that you don't want to use the third engine. However, if a manufacturer wants, they CAN get their trijet certified to be operated on only two engines under normal conditions (This will be a costly exercise and defeat the purpose of having three jets in the first place).
Also i think not running third engine would create a lot of drag as the engine opening is still there ,hence there is no benefit in fuel consumption. Attaching a pointy cover on the intake to enhance aerodynamics might be a good idea on the Tri star.
Thank you! I wondered why that curious engine in the tail since I saw a trijet for the first time 25 years ago (operated by Swissair for the Asian routes)!
Once again an amazing video. Cheers! Although I had a question that why aren't flight attendants given basic flying training in case of incapacitation of both pilots in the cockpit. I'll be glad if u could answer this. Thanks :)
You use the rudder pedals to stay on the centerline during the takeoff and landing rolls. They control both the rudder and nosewheel when the plane is on the ground. When taxiing, you use the nosewheel tiller instead, which allows much sharper turns than the rudder pedals. There's a system that centers the nosewheel whenever there's no weight on it.
You don't use the tiller when it's icy, you'll just skid the nosewheel. Intertia is really a bitch when there isn't much traction to be had :-) you don't really use the rudder pedals at all but insted the "tiptoe" brakes on top of the rudder pedals. Top of pedal is for differential braking, bottom is for rudder, which will do absolutely jack all on the ground.
Funny story I read about on the intro of the 727. Pilot was flying the 1st 727 into LaGuardia and ATC told him he was number fifty something in the stack. The pilot radioed back he was fine and that he was coming in on three engines. The controller saw on his marker(before electronics controllers used markers on the screen with grease pencils) Boeing 72~. The pilot was "surprised " when all of a sudden he got all kinds of priority treatment getting down. The controller asked the pilot if they needed emergency equipment out. My guess is the controller thought it was a Boeing 720, a four engined, smaller version of a 707. Never did hear about the controllers first look at the aircraft.
Hi, I've been flying coroprate jets for 25 years now.. I have 9000 hours in Falcon Tri-jets and I also fly the Gulfstream G550. One point besides redundancy of engines for extended overwater and remote area flights, is the performance gains during engine failure scenarios. My G550 engines produce 15,380 lbs of thrust each, (30,720 lbs) for an aircraft with a maximum ramp weight of 91,400 lbs. Pretty good thrust to weight ratio, even a maximum takeoff weight. However, my Falcon 900LX, has three engines with 5000 lbs thrust. (15,000 lbs total with a maximum takeoff weight of 49,000 lbs. However with the loss of an engine during critical takeoff, after V1, the Falcon has a 1:4.9 Thrust to weight ratio at maximum takeoff, whereas the more powerful Gulfstream has only 1:5.94 Thrust to weight.. The Falcon will siginificantly out perform the Gulfstream after an engine failure and climb significantly better. Climb ability is the power you have in excess of that required for straight and level flight at a given weight and speed. Additionally, in the event of an engine failure say, over extreme mountains, or over an extended overwater flight, The Falcon driftdown altitude at mid-weight is still well above 31,000 feet, whereas the Gulfsteam is below FL270 in most scenarios.. The Falcon trijet will provide much longer endurance after a engine failure at mid-weight by maintaining altitude. Don't get me wrong, we bought the G550 because we need to be able to fly for 14 hour missions on a regular basis, a stretch for any other plane except new G650, global 7000. The newer 8x and Global 6000 are close there. I prefer the 8x, but the Gulstream is still the long range Champ
@Tony Quigley I highly doubt that Ron Clark is the name of a non-english speaking fellow. I'm guessing that he forgot to type the word "are". This would be a rather silly place to be condescending to a person for imperfect use of the English language considering the lovely host/narrator of this channel. P.S. We can't all be perfect in every way like you!
United Airlines 232 into Sioux City Iowa was a tri-jet DC-10 which lost its center engine, and with it, hydraulics and many other systems. The pilots succeeded in saving nearly half of the passengers using differential thrust only to control the plane. I believe that accident was part of the reason we don't see many tri-jets anymore.
Bin einige male mit der Boeing 727 geflogen. Sie startet wie ein Formel 1 Rennwagen in hebt wie ein Kampfjet ab. Die stark angewinkelten und weit nach hinten gesetzten Tragflächen mit dem T Leitwerk geben dieser Maschine eine einzigartige schöne Silhouette. Die 727 ist für mich immer noch das schönste Passagierflugzeug der Welt. Auch von der Konstruktion her sollte die Boeing Vorteile gegenüber den klassischen Maschinen mit 2 Triebwerken unter den Flügeln haben. Das Fahrwerk braucht nicht so hochbeinig gebaut werden. Insofern ist es auch konstruktiv einfacher dieses zu fertigen. Außerdem haben die am hinteren Rumpf befestigten Triebwerke viel mehr Befestigungsfläche wie bei einer Anbringung am Flügel. Die Kräfte die ein Tragwerk aushalten muss entfallen bei der 727. Das Höhenleitwerk ist durch seine Bauform nicht den Verwirbelungen der Tragflächen ausgesetzt. Auch das aus Konstruktionsgründen weit nach hinten versetzte Hauptfahrwerk lässt keine Bodenberührung bei dem Abheben der Maschine zu. Extreme Winkel sind deshalb völlig Problemlos. Weiterhin ist der Treibstoff in den Tragflächen und in der Rumpfunterseite von den Triebwerken weiter entfernt. Grundsätzlich sind auch die Turbinen nicht so in Bodennähe angebracht was als Sicherheitsvorteil zu werten ist. Wegen der stark gefeilten Flügelform kann auch der Luftwiderstand nicht so groß sein wie das bei den anderen Maschinen der Fall ist. Das hintere Höhenruder kann insgesamt aus dem Rumpfhinterteil in der Nähe der Motorenaufhängung bewegt werden. Ebenfalls kann das Seitenleitwerk damit Bestandteil der Versteifung des hinteren Rumpfes werden. Bei anderen Konstruktionen wird das Seitenleitwerk immer auf dem Rumpf oben mit Bolzen befestigt was auch als instabil angesehen werden kann. Die Vorflügel sind bei der 727 durchgängig an dem Tragwerk nutzbar. Außerdem wird bei der 727 der Abgasstrahl nicht unter den Tragflächen geführt. Die mit Überschall ausströmende Luft vermindert den Auftrieb weil sich der Überdruck unter den Flügeln zu einem Teil wieder abströmt. Wenn die Boeing 777 einer Konstruktion wie das bei der 727 der Fall ist entfällt natürlich die komplexe Fertigung am Heck weil kein drittes Triebwerk verbaut werden müsste. Die großflächige Anbringung der Motoren kann in Tropfenform erfolgen. Die Strömungseigenschaften solcher Bauweise sind erheblich besser wie das bei den Tragflächengondeln der Fall ist. Auch arbeiten die Rückstosskräfte der Triebwerke nicht an dem Höhenleitwerk wie bei der 777 welches bis zum deutlich sichtbaren flattern führt. Letztendlich wäre sogar der runde Rumpf (oft auch als Röhre bezeichnet) länger. Das Volumen vergrößert sich allein deswegen Weil man nicht bereits kurz hinter dem Tragwerk mit der Abflachung nach oben beginnen Muss um eine Bodenberührung auszuschließen. Der Rumpf könnte viel weiter hinten einfach spitz zulaufen. Die Strömungseigenschaften würden auch sehr viel besser. Hinzu kommt die bessere Gleiteigenschaft bei Notwasserungen. Kommt eines der beiden Triebwerke zuerst mit dem Wasser in Berührung reist es das Flugzeug auseinander. Nur wenn beide Triebwerke zugleich mit identischer Fläche und dann auch noch ohne Wellengang (wie das im Hudson River der Fall war) kann bei Gondeln eine Notlandung auf dem Wasser gelingen Auch auf Wüstensand könnte so ein Flugzeug besser auf dem Rumpf gleiten. Bei einer Anbringung am Rumpf stellt sich dieses Problem erst gar nicht. Wenn beide Triebwerke am hinteren Rumpf so angebracht werden, dass sich die ausströmende Luft nicht parallel zur Flugrichtung beweget sondern versetzt (wie ein V nach hinten) dann würde beim Ausfall eines der beiden Motore das Flugzeug selbst stabilisieren. Zudem würde der Wirkungsgrad besser sein weil jeder Abgasstrom sein eigenes Luftpolster hat. (ähnlich wie bei dem Bodeneffekt nur eben nicht so stark). Es gibt aber noch weitere Vorteile einer Anbringung der Tourbienen am Heck. Der Schub am Heck ist für das Flugverhalten immer von Vorteil. Die Notrutschen sind kürzer und damit leichter. Toiletten und Wickelräume können auf angehobener Ebene den Heckbereich voll nutzen. Würde gerne mal eine 777 in der Bauform der Boeing 727 sehen. Bei unverändertem Tankvolumen müssten die 777 800-1000km mehr Rechweite aufweisen und das bei größerem Innenraum.
3 engine aircraft are awesome, very nice redundancy. In my opinion they are worth the added fuel, weight, and costs for greater safety and reliability.
Trijets are also visually gorgeous too in my opinion. So many planes look virtually the same but whenever you see one of these, you can't take your eyes away. Beautiful birds and I hope to see one someday 🥰
What an absolutely gorgeous day that you filmed the narration! Too bad we can't all be transported there with picnic baskets. We could watch the airport traffic. ...grin... Thank you for taking the time and energy to do this video. I am not a pilot but I have had a lifelong love affair with airplanes. I can remember in the 9th grade when asked to do a classroom presentation of our choice, I presented on the SPAD and the Fokker. I may even still have those little plastic planes I used.
I loved the TriStar...L1011... she was a beast of a plane... and when those RR engines started up it was awesome with all of the smoke.... First and last ride on it was Eastern Air Lines... from ATL to CLT. Never forget it..
This video made me subscribe. I don't really know much about aviation, but I LOVE watching aviation videos. I think now, after years of fascination, I will learn a lot from your channel. Love the L-1011 take off. Thank you.
One word: Efficiency. You don't need three engines when two modern ones will do the job and cost less to operate and maintain.
@Chandler White
Didn't mentor just splain that chandler?
lier! you need 3 to be a charm ... only the irish would know
You repeating what he said bro
Thanks for letting me skip the video.
@@redboyjan You can skip the 11 minute video now. I saved you that much time.
You're welcome.
He's either absolutely massive or he's standing on a zebra crossing.
Ummm. I don't get it.
@@pegleg2959 The combination of two things: the apparent width of the strip is too small for a major aircraft, and the black and white stripes suggest the humorous alternative of a crossing lane for black and white striped zebras.
@@gregorybarrett4998 but it looks like a normal general aviation runway, and he's standing on the threshold.
airliners need custom weight and balance calculations with this man in the cockpit
he is 10 feet high
ETOPS - Engine Turning Or Passengers Swimming...
Someone else who knows that!
Dude must’ve learned this acronym in Power plant Frame Aviation class.
what is that mean?
Every Trijet On Production Stop
Extended Range Twin Engine Operations
Such an unmistakable sound the huge trijets made… I’d recognize that sound anywhere. Sad to see so few left, but understandable. Always happy when I get to see a FedEx MD-10 or MD-11 at my airport.
(DC-10)
Atc: runway 26L closed due to person on runway😂
😂😂
ATCkeepsUsafe sure he is on green screen
@ATCkeepsUsafe r/woosh
ATC must be airforceproud59, oh wait I meant groundpound69.
@@farugamer4616 his shadow says something else
I always thought the DC-10 and L-1011 were great looking airliners. Thanks for sharing this.
John Kelley shame the dc 10 was a death trap
@@danjackson2014 No it wasnt
@@danjackson2014 that is greatly exaggerated. I'd say the DC9 was scarier based on the history!
Yep, the L-1011 was a favorite to fly in.
@Dan Jackson, no it wasn’t. It just wasn’t as lucky as the L-1011.
The L-1011 had a triple engine failure but luckily didn’t crash. The DC-10 had no such incident.
Shrapnel impacted every one of the L-1011s four hydraulic systems after a centre engine fan explosion. Only luck kept one system intact.
The L-1011s stabilizer jammed in the full nose up position. Never happened to a DC-10. Only luck kept it from crashing.
The L-1011 was late into service, not very many were made, it was a maintenance nightmare, production ended early, and they were retired early. It only flew a fraction of the hours the DC-10 did. The TU-114 was “safer” than the L-1011 for the same reasons.
The L-1011 couldn’t even be certified in its original form due to engines that would explode on impact with birds.
You forgot to mention the best selling tri jet of all: the Boeing 727...
You're right, I'm guessing he was focusing too much on the long range trijets (even though the Trident and TU-154 weren't long range jets)
You're right.
Your Right
Zoggin-noggin
Im weird though
Plz check the description
Whisper jet. So quiet.
I do know that once Boeing got US government approval for flying across oceans with twin engine aircraft, the end of the three engine jet was eminent. 777 twin engines flew to Hawaii and approval was given.
Did Boeing get it before Airbus? I thought they got it first, so that meant Boeing would get it as well soon and others likewise and so no need for 3 engines.
I stii believe, the more engines, the better. Loved the 747 and A-340. Sadly, they're almost obsolete.
@@jocelynharris-fx8ho the a340 was obsolete before it ever rolled out the factory
Give him a like...He stood there for 10 minutes talking to a camera...
Sub'ed
with an ice cream cone in his jacket
that is a puppy @@GregGolightly
YOU give him a like. I'm going to give him one of those Baby Boom super-sonic trijets
He can stand because he is not drunk @Whiskey Man
Impressive that you do the entire video in one take
Gentleman knows his stuff, I'd fly with him any day.
@@humanonearth1 put him in flight 191 lets see how well he does
MidnightDeluxe Gaming well he flies in the 737 so I don’t think he is qualified to fly the DC-10 since he had no training on it
8;20, bad cut.
@@joshuaare1 well we'll see how he does in flight 11
My son is 2.5 and shows an absolute interest on airplanes and especially really big planes. His favorite thing to do is just going to the airport and watch planes takeoff and land. I absolutely hope your channel is still around when he’s a bit older to inspire him to follow the aviation industry. Thanks for what you do!
Honda Ridgeline Wow! I wish I could get my son to do that with me! I'm like your son, always looking at airplanes overhead. One day, two airliners overhead appeared to be racing each other, almost side by side at 30-something thousand feet. I said Look at those jets, they're racing! He looked up and said, Dad airplanes are boring. My soul was crushed, lol!!! I still make he go plane spotting with me sometimes but he doesn't get as excited as I do. Enjoy your time with your son!
Nice hobby!!
Ditto with my son. But he's over 30 now, and too busy to do plane spotting.
L-1011 has always been my favorite jet to see since I was a little kid
I miss that S duct sweep. The look was akin to an F1 car, and the fact there was a tunnel running that deep in the fuselage, just blew my mind. To this day that tail still represents the magic of airtravel for me.
Did you know that back in the early '70s Boeing had plans to develop a trijet version of the 747 with a shorter fuselage? A major redesign of the wings would have been necessary and it would have much different handling characteristics, so Boeing instead decided to develop a shorter 747 that still had four engines, resulting in the 747SP.
that trijet version of the 747 (known as the 300 before the real big hump 300 later on) has always been a big what if to me on one hand i think it would have done very well due to timing size and economics but on the other hand due to market crowding and fuel and pax numbers etc at the time i have a feeling it would have tanked
Matthew Neathery it would have had a look similar to the L1011.
Should have been called
"747 SB" for Short Bus.
@@davecrupel2817 It was originally - but it was for Short Body
The S-ducting was also responsible for causing compressor stall/surge.
Flew on a Tristar in the 80s. Such a lovely plane, I remember it being extremely smooth and quiet.
Whisperliner!
Too advanced for its time, would be great if Lockheed would make them again
Infovest 🖕🏻
@Infovest you douche canoe
Ok boomers
My grandfather flew for Delta for 27 years and during his time, they rented some DC-10s before taking delivery on their L-1011s. When I asked him which he enjoyed flying more, he said that the DC-10 was a better handling airplane and responded quicker to pilot input, but that the L-1011 was so much more advanced and so much more refined that he was glad his later career saw him in the Lockheed. His all-time favorite airliner to fly, however, was the Convair 880. He really liked that plane.
For over 40 years I have flown extensively, and many flights were on DC10s, L1011s. Between the two, I found the DC10 to be the quieter of the two. I also thought it looked better. Specifically, American. Delta, TWA and Eastern flew L1011s. I mainly traveled on Delta, but occasionally, TWA and Eastern. I was a Road Warrior for 17 years. From the late 80s up until mid 2000s. Love everything about commercial aviation, and thankful for RUclips!
I love your discussions on all things aviation! Always come away more knowledgeable. Thanks!
I flew a leg from Georgia to D/FW on a Tristar once. That is one WWWIIIIDDDDEEEE aircraft.
Smooth and no turbulence felt. L1011
Maybe, if there's ever gonna be any demand for a really huge aircraft with a capacity of 400-500 passengers again, i.e. something like the 747 or the A380, that's where Tri-Jets might come back again in the future. Because, let‘s face it: Three engines are still more efficient than four.
Imagine an airliner with three GE90s ... that'd be a beast! 😁
Now that I would want to see n hear lol
I often go YVR airport to watch planes and really miss seeing the DC-10's and MD-11's landing and taking off. When a DC-10 is taxiing directly toward you, the high pitched shriek coming from the mid engine's intake tube is truly awesome. Plus the mid engine looks so much larger than it really is, and makes the plane look very powerful.
Very good briefing on tri engine , Captain, I love your video podcast. This third jet engine is very useful if main engine fails in severe failure.
another really awesome episode captain! glad to know that you also like trijets,
I always dreamed to fly one of those, especially the dc10 or md11.
Back in the day, I flew a lot back and forth to college. Mostly, I flew in 737s. Hated them. Like flying in a sardine can that got buffeted around by kids playing kick the can. Only flew once in a jumbo jet, an L-1011. Like flying in your living room. I was actually listening to the pilots talking to the ATC during the descent, but it was so smooth, that I didn't realize we were descending until the tires hit the runway and I am not exaggerating. What a great experience! Beautiful plane!
I loved the 727. Gorgeous airplane. Everybody moved too close to airports and then started complaining. So no more 727 hot rods.
The best airline flight also included the best airline meal I ever had. If you are young, they really used to serve full meals with metal silverware and everything.
But, I digress. It was an L-1011 TriStar. Smooth and quiet. Plus it looked sexy. Great curves...including the S-duct. Mmmmm.
I always hated the looks of the DC-10. The third engine always looked like an afterthought to me. Like they were too lazy to do it right so they just slapped it up top in the vertical stabilizer.
My second best passenger flight experience was in a C-5 Galaxy. Smooth and quiet except for hearing the flap and gear motors. But I liked that.
Ironically, that was the second best meal I’ve ever been served on an airplane. We were heading off to the Gulf War. I appreciated the meal tremendously.
The only draw back to the C-5? There’s no “people eaters” or gates at Dover. To get to the rearward facing passenger compartment a climb up a steep ~14 foot ladder is required.
Not easy, or stabile with 60+ pounds on your back.
To this day and hundreds of airline flights later. It’s the only airplane where I could not feel when we actually landed. I heard the power reduction for descent. Heard the flap motor and gear doors open and the gear clunk into down and locked position...and then we were taxiing. Amazing. Still amazing to think about that today.
Another memory from that time long ago was arriving at Dover and as far as he eye could see were parked C-5s being loaded or unloaded or fueled.
And these were all on the ground in Dover. Imagine how many were inbound or outbound from Europe and the ME. And on the ground overseas.
I was an airplane buff but my jaw dropped when I saw how many C-5s were on the ground in Dover. Still in awe at the military power projection that represented.
Michael Meyers dam u wrinting boi
I would move to an airport SO i could hear the beautiful noise.
Why is is so long
Flew the L 1011 back and forth across the US in the early 80s. LOVED IT!
I was working for Rolls-Royce in the late 60s when the first RB211 3 shaft gas turbines were being designed and developed. The first aircraft they were intended to be used on were the Lockheed L1011 so tri-jets were certainly being more than thought about before the 1970s as mentioned here. I left RR just before the 'crash' in 1970 caused by the design problems with carbon fibre fan blades and the extra cost in using titanium (which is now standard).
I rejoined RR a few years later and remained until retirement but, as I recall, one of the problem with centre engine was that S shaped intake duct which meant air intake was inevitably restricted. My field was the design of electronic measurement and control systems on test beds and rigs so the details of aerodynamic design were almost as much a mystery to me as to the general public :)
Like all your videos, very well presented and explained. Thanks
I can answer this question in 30 seconds. Engines became more powerful and reliable thus eliminating the need for a costly third engine.
Great man! There is a bit more to it but, 👏
@@MentourPilot bi engine jets can counter rotate engines which increase the stability...
Then how does trijets manage to stabilize the flight... And can maneuver 🤔
@@ArjotGill sorry, no, the engines all turn the same way in jets.
Counter rotating was only done on a few propeller aircraft.
The airport he is standing in looks so calm and tranquil af
Great to see all the appreciation for the beautiful L-1011 Tristar. I am putting in a shout for the Tu-154, a handsome beast of a plane, ruggedly built to cope with terrible runways and could sing too! 🛩 💜
Its pretty cool to see your excitement over your favorite style jet.I'm not a flyer but your enthusiasm makes for enjoyable and informative videos.
Nowadays ETOPS means: Engines Turning Or Parcels Sinking :-)
One.more reason: hull becomes noisy, i've flown Tu-154 in 90's and damn it was impossible to sleep, especially with econom class.
Blame that on lack of soundproofing, soviet era aircraft are notorious for the amount of noise they produce.
Very interesting! Thanks for taking the time to make the video. L-1011 was my favorite.
As kid, watching that 3rd engine standing above, and with the loud sound from the old turbojets... Gotta admit I was scared about them 😂🤣
Now, the design and sound, is so nostalgic 😢
ETOPS = Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim
Hahaha ... now that's an acronym difficult to forget.
hahahahahaha Good one!
ETOPS:Extended range twin engine operation Standard
ETOPS should sound like ERTEOS doesnt it?? well i think the whoever who came up with ''ETOPS'' was really thinking Engine Turns Or Passengers Swim!!
There’s one Wendover Production viewer
I loved the Trident. Takes me back to the seventies!
I saw 8 Hawker Siddeley,Tridents all parked-up at Beijing Nanyuan Airport last year. These were sold new to China in the 1970s.
+therealnightwriter Unless you designed the rear fuselage with some extra space to begin with... I do agree that a modern high bypass-ratio turbofan engine would be very difficult to to retro-fit due to their size, but with fuel-efficiency a priority these days, I could see three engines used for take-off & climb to altitude (and remember, there are many airports that require pretty steep climb angles to minimize noise or clear terrain), and then shutting down the third engine (if you had retractable intake ducts to eliminate drag) for a very fuel-efficient cruise on the two main engines- it would also increase the T.B.O. of the third engine, saving on maintenance costs. Any aircraft manufacturers/designers who read this, please feel free to send me obscene amounts of money and use my idea!
The earlier tri-jets are actually late 50s/early 60s designs. The Trident project began in 1958.
TheFunkadelicFan count music
Umm, excuse me? Trident is a fork. It is tri jet
Nice one bro! Well done! As I said in Patreon comments, I like the "studio"!
OMG, the L1011 remains one of my most favorite flying experiences, ever. Such a sulky and smooth flyer
-silky, perhaps?
@@patrickflohe7427 -- yeh...my bad.
One of the pitfalls of placing an engine in the middle of the aerodynamic controls is that an engine failure may result in total loss of control.
Engines
Turn
Or
Passengers
Swim
:)
There's a more in-depth explanation into ETOPS at the Wendover Productions channel, which mentions that ETOPS is not just about the aircraft landing safely to the nearest airport but also consists of airlines having a plan to accommodate the passengers at the unexpected location.
Link providing, kill you, it would?
RUclips tends to automatically delete comments with links in them.
ICSirvinite &
Extended range twin operations performance standards
I think
ETOPS = Engines Turning or Passengers Screaming. My husband is an airline mechanic...I know what it means.
its actually engines turn or passengers swim (as far as i know)
I loved flying in the DC10. I flew in them when Sir Freddie Laker had the Skytrain service. When the engine fell off the wing of that DC10 in Chicago - a month before my flight to California, the aircraft was changed to a 707 and later a Tristar.
Love the setting of this video! You just need your couch now in the middle of the runway.
The TriStar was a wonderful airliner for it's time. Pilots loved to fly the shorter/higher performance -500 series. The RB211's were a little finicky in hot and high airports and thus earned the nickname "Tri To Starts". PSA even outfitted theirs with a lounge in the "basement" (vs a galley) for the LAX to SFO run. L10111's were truly ahead of their time with Cat 3 autoland capability.
I love the fact that Dassault kept the tri-jet formation for their Falcon 7X & 8X and the fact that Boom has decided to make a BEAUTIFUL tri-jet SST.
I love the Lockheed TriStar
I love your vids. I worked on A7-A Navy attack aircraft in the early / mid 1970's . AQ-2. More of a Radar / Weapons release electronics Tech.. I loved being on the flight line.
Every time I go to an airport and smell JP-5 fumes, it reminds me of my days on the flight line.. Thank you.
Good stuff, mate ! Keep going ! However, on your array of tri-jets examples you forgot to mention the Boeing 727...!!! By far, the fastest of all commercial tri-jets is the Tupolev Tu-154.
One disadvantage of the DC-10/MD-11 arrangement, with the engine atop the fuselage rather than behind it, is that the engine took up space on the fin which would have otherwise been part of the rudder. Looking at the L-1011 you can see that the Tristar had a full-length rudder while the one on the DC- 10 is much smaller.
“Boom”? Is that the best name for an airliner?
Great video. However you did not mention the most popular of all tri-jets, the Boeing-727.
As always very informative and impressive knowledge of aircraft. Flown on many tristar jets loved the sound and the ride.
I flew on both the DC10 and the L1011. I don't think I have ever flown on a more comfortable, quiet and roomy airplane than the Tri-Star. I really loved to fly on that plane and I'm somewhat of a "white-knuckled" flyer. What I really thought rather impressive was the below deck galley and the elevator that was used by the flight attendants to bring meals (now there is a piece of pleasurable memorabilia) from the below deck galley area to the passengers deck.
Lol mentour ! That ending was classic ! Did you reach V1?
Tristar was the most comfortable lovely aircraft after Concord
I guess the thumbnail image is wrong, the center engine is number 2. Engines are always numbered left to right.
Always loved flying on Deltas L1011s Smoothest ride outside a 747.The L1011s used to come over the Navy base in San Diego where i was stationed like the 727s much quieter than those damn Dc9s or 737s. Thanks for the video.Thomas Fritz
Mentour: "Hey guys, it's Mentour!"
Me: "YOU'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A RUNWAY!"
😂😂
my dad flew the DC10, i absolutely love them !
P.S. your content is a gold mine. just like how the courses in the app are wonderful and so helpful. i'm currently doing my type rating on the 777 and feel like i'm in heaven !! Keep on going the great work Mentour !!!
@0:17 I flew with a three engined Tupolev to Bulgaria in 2004.
Never flew in a trijet before. Growing up in Southeast Asia, my parents took me on plenty of trips in the 747 until I was 12. Then I spent 20 years in North America until I returned to Asia for an interview. That was my first time seeing the 777-300ER being towed to the gate I was at.
Just thinking about its engines was mind blowing. The fan diameter was larger than that of a 737 fuselage. It produces more power than a container ship engine. And just one of those has to take such a huge airplane with a full load of passengers and fuel to the sky (after V1 that is).
I´m one of very few Norwegians that have worked as cabin crew on Lockheed 1011 TriStar. That since TriStar never was used by SAS and any other Norwegian airlines. I worked for Air OPS.
Question: Do airlines have to operate the third engine in a trijet on every flight? considering cost and maintenance. Thanks
Yes. The airplane is certified with 3 engines (all the "normal/non-emergency" specifications such as landing speed, stall speed, landing distance, takeoff distance, V speeds etc are calculated based on 3 engines working), you can't just decide that you don't want to use the third engine. However, if a manufacturer wants, they CAN get their trijet certified to be operated on only two engines under normal conditions (This will be a costly exercise and defeat the purpose of having three jets in the first place).
Also i think not running third engine would create a lot of drag as the engine opening is still there ,hence there is no benefit in fuel consumption. Attaching a pointy cover on the intake to enhance aerodynamics might be a good idea on the Tri star.
You wouldn’t buy a trijet if you weren’t gon operate the tail engine
First jet aircraft I flew on was a Lockheed Tristar. I loved it.
727 was my fav for decades. I glad I flew in them twice. The 737 has grown on me....
Thank you! I wondered why that curious engine in the tail since I saw a trijet for the first time 25 years ago (operated by Swissair for the Asian routes)!
The DC-10 and the MD-11 are just beautiful aircraft.
Once again an amazing video. Cheers! Although I had a question that why aren't flight attendants given basic flying training in case of incapacitation of both pilots in the cockpit. I'll be glad if u could answer this. Thanks :)
Because the risk is so remote.
Mentour Pilot Thank you sir. :)
Also they wouldn't be able to enter the cockpit, right? Without going into safety related topics.
Some kind of parachute system for passengers would make me feel safer . . .
James Neilson Graham Opening up a door with a pressurized cabin is next to impossible.
When landing, how do you assure the nose wheel is steered straight ahead?
You use the rudder pedals to stay on the centerline during the takeoff and landing rolls. They control both the rudder and nosewheel when the plane is on the ground. When taxiing, you use the nosewheel tiller instead, which allows much sharper turns than the rudder pedals. There's a system that centers the nosewheel whenever there's no weight on it.
Donald Stanfield we use the rudder pedals to control direction during the rollout. once taxi speed is reached, the tiller is used
Above a certain speed the nose wheel is locked straight ahead.
Look up Captain Joe vids it explains lot about airplanes systems and flying airliners
You don't use the tiller when it's icy, you'll just skid the nosewheel. Intertia is really a bitch when there isn't much traction to be had :-) you don't really use the rudder pedals at all but insted the "tiptoe" brakes on top of the rudder pedals. Top of pedal is for differential braking, bottom is for rudder, which will do absolutely jack all on the ground.
Great video as usual but I'm mortally wounded that you failed to mention the love of my life for 7 years- B-727!
Loved the L-1011 TriStar. Glorious widebody. Quiet and comfortable.
Great video. Love this stuff. As he mentioned, still see them -mostly DC 10s - as freighters.
you forgot B727 and the Yak 42. Great review though, very informative.
Jackson, MS.
You are genius. I love the passion you have about your machines. It reflects in your narration.
Funny story I read about on the intro of the 727.
Pilot was flying the 1st 727 into LaGuardia and ATC told him he was number fifty something in the stack. The pilot radioed back he was fine and that he was coming in on three engines. The controller saw on his marker(before electronics controllers used markers on the screen with grease pencils) Boeing 72~.
The pilot was "surprised " when all of a sudden he got all kinds of priority treatment getting down. The controller asked the pilot if they needed emergency equipment out.
My guess is the controller thought it was a Boeing 720, a four engined, smaller version of a 707. Never did hear about the controllers first look at the aircraft.
ETOPS
----
Engines
Turn
Or
Passengers
Swim
Flew on the Eastern L-1011 and the Delta L-1011 in the 1980’s ! Great aircraft !!
Hi, I've been flying coroprate jets for 25 years now.. I have 9000 hours in Falcon Tri-jets and I also fly the Gulfstream G550. One point besides redundancy of engines for extended overwater and remote area flights, is the performance gains during engine failure scenarios.
My G550 engines produce 15,380 lbs of thrust each, (30,720 lbs) for an aircraft with a maximum ramp weight of 91,400 lbs. Pretty good thrust to weight ratio, even a maximum takeoff weight. However, my Falcon 900LX, has three engines with 5000 lbs thrust. (15,000 lbs total with a maximum takeoff weight of 49,000 lbs. However with the loss of an engine during critical takeoff, after V1, the Falcon has a 1:4.9 Thrust to weight ratio at maximum takeoff, whereas the more powerful Gulfstream has only 1:5.94 Thrust to weight.. The Falcon will siginificantly out perform the Gulfstream after an engine failure and climb significantly better. Climb ability is the power you have in excess of that required for straight and level flight at a given weight and speed. Additionally, in the event of an engine failure say, over extreme mountains, or over an extended overwater flight, The Falcon driftdown altitude at mid-weight is still well above 31,000 feet, whereas the Gulfsteam is below FL270 in most scenarios.. The Falcon trijet will provide much longer endurance after a engine failure at mid-weight by maintaining altitude.
Don't get me wrong, we bought the G550 because we need to be able to fly for 14 hour missions on a regular basis, a stretch for any other plane except new G650, global 7000. The newer 8x and Global 6000 are close there. I prefer the 8x, but the Gulstream is still the long range Champ
Why some mid size jets are single pilot and others are not? The Embraer Phenom 300 is a single pilot but many of its competitors are not.
When you're asking somrething in english. you ask "Why ARE some mid size".
@Tony Quigley I highly doubt that Ron Clark is the name of a non-english speaking fellow. I'm guessing that he forgot to type the word "are". This would be a rather silly place to be condescending to a person for imperfect use of the English language considering the lovely host/narrator of this channel. P.S. We can't all be perfect in every way like you!
Fun Fact. The Falcon 50's center engine intake is an identical copy as the 727 and used under license and scaled down of course.
I love all the info you come up with that one would never bother to think about or at least ask about out loud.
How do you know when there’s a pilot at the party 🥳? He tells you.
Greg Worcester so true. Lol Gotta love pilots.
Lol that’s so true
Where's the APU on the tri-jets ?
Peter Hazlinger ,
L-1011: Ahead of the horizontal stabilator.
ETOPS = Engines turn, or people swim
United Airlines 232 into Sioux City Iowa was a tri-jet DC-10 which lost its center engine, and with it, hydraulics and many other systems. The pilots succeeded in saving nearly half of the passengers using differential thrust only to control the plane. I believe that accident was part of the reason we don't see many tri-jets anymore.
Bin einige male mit der Boeing 727 geflogen. Sie startet wie ein Formel 1 Rennwagen in hebt wie ein Kampfjet ab. Die stark angewinkelten und weit nach hinten gesetzten Tragflächen mit dem T Leitwerk geben dieser Maschine eine einzigartige schöne Silhouette. Die 727 ist für mich immer noch das schönste Passagierflugzeug der Welt. Auch von der Konstruktion her sollte die Boeing Vorteile gegenüber den klassischen Maschinen mit 2 Triebwerken unter den Flügeln haben. Das Fahrwerk braucht nicht so hochbeinig gebaut werden. Insofern ist es auch konstruktiv einfacher dieses zu fertigen. Außerdem haben die am hinteren Rumpf befestigten Triebwerke viel mehr Befestigungsfläche wie bei einer Anbringung am Flügel. Die Kräfte die ein Tragwerk aushalten muss entfallen bei der 727. Das Höhenleitwerk ist durch seine Bauform nicht den Verwirbelungen der Tragflächen ausgesetzt. Auch das aus Konstruktionsgründen weit nach hinten versetzte Hauptfahrwerk lässt keine Bodenberührung bei dem Abheben der Maschine zu. Extreme Winkel sind deshalb völlig Problemlos. Weiterhin ist der Treibstoff in den Tragflächen und in der Rumpfunterseite von den Triebwerken weiter entfernt. Grundsätzlich sind auch die Turbinen nicht so in Bodennähe angebracht was als Sicherheitsvorteil zu werten ist. Wegen der stark gefeilten Flügelform kann auch der Luftwiderstand nicht so groß sein wie das bei den anderen Maschinen der Fall ist. Das hintere Höhenruder kann insgesamt aus dem Rumpfhinterteil in der Nähe der Motorenaufhängung bewegt werden. Ebenfalls kann das Seitenleitwerk damit Bestandteil der Versteifung des hinteren Rumpfes werden. Bei anderen Konstruktionen wird das Seitenleitwerk immer auf dem Rumpf oben mit Bolzen befestigt was auch als
instabil angesehen werden kann. Die Vorflügel sind bei der 727 durchgängig an dem Tragwerk nutzbar. Außerdem wird bei der 727 der Abgasstrahl nicht unter den Tragflächen geführt. Die mit Überschall ausströmende Luft vermindert den Auftrieb weil sich der Überdruck unter den Flügeln zu einem Teil wieder abströmt. Wenn die Boeing 777 einer Konstruktion wie das bei der 727 der Fall ist entfällt natürlich die komplexe Fertigung am Heck weil kein drittes Triebwerk verbaut werden müsste. Die großflächige Anbringung der Motoren kann in Tropfenform erfolgen. Die Strömungseigenschaften solcher Bauweise sind erheblich besser wie das bei den Tragflächengondeln der Fall ist. Auch arbeiten die Rückstosskräfte der Triebwerke nicht an dem Höhenleitwerk wie bei der 777 welches bis zum deutlich sichtbaren flattern führt. Letztendlich wäre sogar der runde Rumpf (oft auch als Röhre bezeichnet) länger. Das Volumen vergrößert sich allein deswegen Weil man nicht bereits kurz hinter dem Tragwerk mit der Abflachung nach oben beginnen Muss um eine Bodenberührung auszuschließen. Der Rumpf könnte viel weiter hinten einfach spitz zulaufen. Die Strömungseigenschaften würden auch sehr viel besser. Hinzu kommt die bessere Gleiteigenschaft bei Notwasserungen. Kommt eines der beiden Triebwerke zuerst mit dem Wasser in Berührung reist es das Flugzeug auseinander. Nur wenn beide Triebwerke zugleich mit identischer Fläche und dann auch noch ohne Wellengang (wie das im Hudson River der Fall war) kann bei Gondeln eine Notlandung auf dem Wasser gelingen Auch auf Wüstensand könnte so ein Flugzeug besser auf dem Rumpf gleiten. Bei einer Anbringung am Rumpf stellt sich dieses Problem erst gar nicht. Wenn beide Triebwerke am hinteren Rumpf so angebracht werden, dass sich die ausströmende Luft nicht parallel zur Flugrichtung beweget sondern versetzt (wie ein V nach hinten) dann würde beim Ausfall eines der beiden Motore das Flugzeug selbst stabilisieren. Zudem würde der Wirkungsgrad besser sein weil jeder Abgasstrom sein eigenes Luftpolster hat. (ähnlich wie bei dem Bodeneffekt nur eben nicht so stark). Es gibt aber noch weitere Vorteile einer Anbringung der Tourbienen am Heck. Der Schub am Heck ist für das Flugverhalten immer von Vorteil. Die Notrutschen sind kürzer und damit leichter. Toiletten und Wickelräume können auf angehobener Ebene den Heckbereich voll nutzen. Würde gerne mal eine 777 in der Bauform der Boeing 727 sehen. Bei unverändertem Tankvolumen müssten die 777 800-1000km mehr Rechweite aufweisen und das bei größerem Innenraum.
3 engine aircraft are awesome, very nice redundancy. In my opinion they are worth the added fuel, weight, and costs for greater safety and reliability.
The twin engine 767 and 777 have much better safety records. Engine failure was almost unheard of by the 80s.
Trijets are also visually gorgeous too in my opinion. So many planes look virtually the same but whenever you see one of these, you can't take your eyes away. Beautiful birds and I hope to see one someday 🥰
Tri-jets look like the hot rods of the sky, always a fan
No pun intended
What an absolutely gorgeous day that you filmed the narration! Too bad we can't all be transported there with picnic baskets. We could watch the airport traffic. ...grin... Thank you for taking the time and energy to do this video. I am not a pilot but I have had a lifelong love affair with airplanes. I can remember in the 9th grade when asked to do a classroom presentation of our choice, I presented on the SPAD and the Fokker. I may even still have those little plastic planes I used.
I loved the TriStar...L1011... she was a beast of a plane... and when those RR engines started up it was awesome with all of the smoke.... First and last ride on it was Eastern Air Lines... from ATL to CLT. Never forget it..
My first flight was 727. Loved it.
I had wondered why the tail-mounted third engines were always tilted upwards in relation to the fuselage/centerline of the aircraft!
Thanks, M.P.
Great video, is that a runway ?
It is! But for RC aircraft
Yes,, he just stood in the middle of Heathrow airport for 10 minutes
Comrade Ivan lmaooooo
It is a green screen.
727 - you're a pilot and you don't know what a 727 is? Greatest Commercial Jetliner ever built ..
My first jet flight was on a 727. You could board from the front and the rear. Loved it!
This video made me subscribe. I don't really know much about aviation, but I LOVE watching aviation videos. I think now, after years of fascination, I will learn a lot from your channel. Love the L-1011 take off. Thank you.
That's not the way they numbered
engine it's from left to right 1then 2 then 3 so the tail e engine is #2
I know, it was a friend of mine who did the thumbnail.