The DC-10 Twin, a proposed fuel-efficient version of the DC-10 without a third engine

[-]

Reiver93@reddit

Was this before or after the A300 was announced?

[-]

AnswerLopsided2361@reddit

A little bit after, though Douglas had been musing about it on some level since the DC-10 was first developed. Had it not been cancelled, it would have entered service shortly after the A300.

[-]

algarhythms@reddit

Airbus undercut MDD by giving some A300s to Eastern Airlines for free in order to break into the US market. It worked.

[-]

ShamScience@reddit

If removing one engine improved fuel efficiency, imagine how much better it would have been with all three removed!

[-]

Raguleader@reddit

Case in point, the Gimli Glider, a 767 that flew with non engines running!

[-]

chiwawa_42@reddit

Is it a plane ? A bird ? A glider ? No, It's SuperPlane !

[-]

kaleid5@reddit

That's the unweirdest plane I've ever seen

[-]

Raguleader@reddit

Which for DC in the 70s was kind of weird.

[-]

pvsmith2@reddit

It really looks like the a310, fat and short

[-]

ElSquibbonator@reddit

Honestly, if McDonnell Douglas had gone through with this, they might still be around. The lack of a twin-engine widebody airliner was what killed them in the late 80s and early 90s.

[-]

You could argue that they are still around, since the McDD management ended up in charge after the merger with Boeing. A lot of Boeing's problems in the last couple decades have been blamed on that fact.

[-]

ElSquibbonator@reddit

Kind of like how Discovery Channel ruined Warner Bros.?

[-]

isaac32767@reddit

That goes back to Time-Warner merging with AOL, just as the Internet made AOL obsolete.

[-]

Ornery_Year_9870@reddit

If only we could go back in time and prevent the merger of Douglas and McDonnell...

[-]

yflhx@reddit

What also killed them was no new aircraft in general. MD-90 was a re-engined MD-80 which was stretched DC-9, and had outdated engine layout; MD-11 also was a re-engined aircraft that also had outdated engine layout. You just can't compete without new designs. Airbus took risk of developing new aircraft, and some worked out (like A320, A330) and some didn't (like A340, A380). Boeing took risk with designing B777 before ETOPS allowed it to shine, and despite already having B747 in similar class. McDonnel Douglas took little risk but as a result they offered outdated aircraft.

Also end of cold war shrinking military orders didn't help either.

[-]

MrScootini@reddit

Technically they are still around. They just merged with Boeing and Boeing took their logo.

[-]

Guysmiley777@reddit

Boeing acquired McDonnel Douglas and the McD MBAs oozed into Boeing's executive team, pushing out the long time Boeing people giving us the post-777 shit-nado of a company.

[-]

TigerIll6480@reddit

As opposed to the pre-merger Boeing team that gave us crap like 737s that spent decades finding new ways to fall out of the sky. 🙄

[-]

Guysmiley777@reddit

Who asked you, commie?

[-]

RevoltingHuman@reddit

They are still around, they’re called Boeing now, though.

[-]

Dr-Beeper@reddit

They couldn't get any American airlines to buy it, that's what killed it.

Info stolen from the wiki article.

[-]

Waste_Curve994@reddit

Just remember…McDDs is still the root of Boeings problems after all these years.

[-]

TigerIll6480@reddit

The 737 was crap long before the merger. 🤷‍♂️

[-]

magnificentfoxes@reddit

Not quite. The DC9, MD8x and 9x, Boeing 717 were solid products. The MD management was crap, but the lack of engineering focus at Boeing and relentless pennypincher attitude to make profit at all costs, plus moving their HQ is what's really sending them downhill fast. Some people say it's the MD Management moving to Boeing what's done it. Maybe that was the start of it, but it's not the entire cause.

[-]

blastcat4@reddit

Which engine would they have gone with?

[-]

IOfWooglin@reddit

Fisher Price plane vibes.

[-]

Immediate-Spite-5905@reddit

this one looks like one of those cartoon planes you find on a travel brpchure

[-]

Kevin-747-400-2206@reddit

Douglas really wanted to build this aircraft, there was a lot of interest from airlines in Europe for the DC-10 Twin.

Sadly however the McDonnell management who had overall control over Douglas after the 1967 merger didn't want to spend money on a project they believed was 'wasteful', since the DC-10 Twin would have competed directly against the already existing three engined DC-10-10 and the brand new Airbus A300.

McDonnell believed that the DC-10 Twin would only be financially successful with the help of American based carriers, however the American companies unlike the ones in Europe didn't have much intrest in the aircraft at the time, despite the continued protests from Douglas, McDonnell's executives voted to cancel the project in July 1973.

This decision was by far one of the biggest blunders that the McDonnell made as the DC-10 Twin could have seriously killed the Airbus A300 and allow McDonnell Douglas to dominate the widebody twin engine market before the arrival of the Boeing 767.

[-]

The A300 had its first flight in October 1972 and it took till into service early 1974 for it to see commercial service.

[-]

Dr-Beeper@reddit

Coincidentally the same exact year that the a300 started production.

1971

[-]