Originally Posted by
Tango
. . . Then the real reason why Douglas changed the name of the DC-10 to MD-11 had nothing to do with the series of accidents that plagued the DC-10 that killed 100's of innocent people.
I wouldn't say the DC-10 was defectively designed, but it wasn't designed to be idiot proof if a something else happened. It's sort of like the flap bolts that caused the CI 737 to catch fire a few weeks back, or Concorde and its easily-punctured fuel tanks from tyre ruptures (several prior incidents to 2000).
I can think of 3 incidents. The first is the TK crash (PAR-LON) flight in the '70s. Due to a cargo hold door that wasn't designed to be idiot-proof. It could be forced to be shut, but really wasn't. Sort of like a defective latch on one's door that seems shut but will pop open. The doors were redesigned to be idiot proof.
http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2005/apr/42-43.pdf
The 2nd was the AA crash at Chicago. Deemd to be caused by AA's improper engine maintenance procedure which damaged the engine mounting flange and related parts.
http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publ...hare-full.html
The 3rd was the Sioux City crash landing. One of the fan discs in the P&W tail-mounted engine suffered an uncontained failure which severed hydraulic control lines. Douglas had neglected to put in check valves to prevent loss of hydraulics in such an event.
http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR90-06.pdf
SR111 may have similar reasons. SR had installed an AVOD system which made it vulnerable to an electrical fire.