• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

McDonnell Douglas little known airliners

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi everybody,

During the 1987/1988 McDonnell-Douglas tried to make a deal with Airbus to develope
MD-330 airliner,which was based on a stretch MD-11 airframe with Airbus A300 wing to
compete Boeing-747,but the McDonnell later developed the design MD-12,anther series
of little known airliner were MD-91,MD-92,MD-94X and for China airliner MD-115 and MD-805.
the sources,some Arabic magazines.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

McDonnell MD-12 was first designed as single deck as stretch version of MD-11 but later
developed as double deck and MD-XX was first designed as twin turbofans later redesigned
as Tri-engined.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
409
Here's the MDD-Airbus Harbinger D-330 .
(from AIR Pictorial .5.83 )
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Thank you my dear Jemiba,

about D-330,and there was also a twin engined version of
McDonnell MD-11, and MD-89 was stretch version of MD-82
could carry 173 passengers and with range of 4830 km,later
was cancelled.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

the McDonnell Douglas MD-91X was propfan powered
aircraft project,accommodated 100 to 110 passenger
and the same also the MD-92X 150-seat and MD-94X
160 to 180 seat,they were developed from MD-80
series.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Thank you my dear flateric,

and I searched about any drawing to MD-94X but I did't
find.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
409
Sorry, no MD-94X, but the model 253, a VTOL passenger aircraft,
using a modified DC-9-10 fuselage. Vertical take-off and landing
should be achieved by fans at the wingtips and in the nose and
by two fans at the rear fuselage, which doubled as cruising engines.
(from Aviation Week, July 1973)
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Very nice project my dear Jemiba.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

the MDC ATMR2 airliner aircraft project of 1978.

http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1978/1978%20-%200847.html?search=lockheed%20aircraft%20project%201978
 

Attachments

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
409
Unfortunately no type numbers for these small twin turbo-fan MDD designs,
for 30, 50 and 70 passengers:
(from Aviation Week 1975)
 

Attachments

Skybolt

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,297
Reaction score
48
In January 2008 issue of Le Fanà there is a witty article by Renè Francillon on the (inexistent) relationship of Douglas with market research studies, devoted particulary to the development of the DC-10, during which Renè was responsible for market research at Douglas. The article is fun to read and includes some pearls, like: info on model numbers, two drawings of developmental versions of DC-10 (the ones with the third motor in low position in the vertical tail with splitted intakes), info of odd versions (asymmetrical engine positions), a pre DC-10 double deck jumbo-like (no, not the one derived fro the HLS submission) and, very interesting for me in particular, an art of a transonic version of the DC-10, completed with area-ruled fuselage (MDD was thought as the sole American airliner maker not interested in transonics in early '70s, now it is evident that they WERE interested, at least in the NASA contracts).
No image posting for obvious reasons...
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Thank you my dears Jemiba and skybolt,

the McDonnell Douglas AST aircraft project of 1979.
http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1979/1979%20-%204335.pdf
 

Attachments

KJ_Lesnick

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
1,026
Reaction score
13
I saw this artist-concept awhile ago for a plane called the DC-XX. It looks eerily like a Boeing 757 except it's cockpit windows are shaped slightly different, it has larger windows, and it uses a beaver-tail tail-cone.

Has anyone seen any information, pictures, drawings etc, of such a plane?

K.J.
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,841
Reaction score
349
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1991/1991%20-%203316.html and following pages
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1991/1991%20-%200406.html and following pages
 

Attachments

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
409
Well known, the DC-9, but not in this form, I think, first released in June 1959, as a
DC-8 look-alike, but much smaller with four JTF10A-1 turbofans:
( from AI 6/1980)
 

Attachments

chornedsnorkack

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
Consider the final, 1996 specifications of MD-XX:

http://md-eleven.net/MD11-MD12-undeveloped-models

What are interesting to see here:

The wingspan, 64,8 m or so, fits the 65 m box much like B747-400 and B777-300ER.

The wing reference area is 483 sq m. Considerably bigger than the wing of A340-600 and B777-300ER, but smaller than B747-400.

MTOGW is 365 tons. Compare with 350 tons of B777-300ER, 368 tons of A340-600 and 380 to of A340-600HGW.

The fuselage stretch is less than that of 777. The total lengths are MD-11 61,7 m, MD-XX Stretch 71,2 m, B777-200 63,7 m, B777-300 73,9 m, A340-500 67,9 m, A340-600 75,3 m.

The main gear arrangements are MD-11 4-2-4, B777 6-6 unchanged, MD-XX 6-4-6, A340-600 4-4-4. Thus MD-XX would have as many main wheels as B747.

The engine thrust was only slightly increased compared to MD-11. 62 000 to 65 000 pounds is just 5 % increase, while MTOGW was increased by 28% or so from 285 tons of MD11ER. Then, wing area was increased by over 40 %, so MD-XX would have lower wing loading than MD-11, take off at a slower speed and need less acceleration to reach it at a given runway length.

Was the engine model and manufacturer for MD-XX known?

What was the fan diametre supposed to be?

What was the status and current specifications of A340-600, A340-500, B777-300ER and B777-200LR as of 1996?
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,077
Reaction score
409
From Aviation Week 14/1975, a turboprop short-haul design from the '80s,
that fell through, because the airlines then preferred jet designs.
Some data : 50 pax, cruising speed Mach 0.6 at 20,000 ft, two
4.480 shp engines (type unknown)
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19820025499_1982025499.pdf
 

Attachments

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,510
Reaction score
571
chornedsnorkack said:
Consider the final, 1996 specifications of MD-XX:

http://md-eleven.net/MD11-MD12-undeveloped-models

What are interesting to see here:

The wingspan, 64,8 m or so, fits the 65 m box much like B747-400 and B777-300ER.

The wing reference area is 483 sq m. Considerably bigger than the wing of A340-600 and B777-300ER, but smaller than B747-400.

MTOGW is 365 tons. Compare with 350 tons of B777-300ER, 368 tons of A340-600 and 380 to of A340-600HGW.

The fuselage stretch is less than that of 777. The total lengths are MD-11 61,7 m, MD-XX Stretch 71,2 m, B777-200 63,7 m, B777-300 73,9 m, A340-500 67,9 m, A340-600 75,3 m.

The main gear arrangements are MD-11 4-2-4, B777 6-6 unchanged, MD-XX 6-4-6, A340-600 4-4-4. Thus MD-XX would have as many main wheels as B747.

The engine thrust was only slightly increased compared to MD-11. 62 000 to 65 000 pounds is just 5 % increase, while MTOGW was increased by 28% or so from 285 tons of MD11ER. Then, wing area was increased by over 40 %, so MD-XX would have lower wing loading than MD-11, take off at a slower speed and need less acceleration to reach it at a given runway length.

Was the engine model and manufacturer for MD-XX known?

What was the fan diametre supposed to be?

What was the status and current specifications of A340-600, A340-500, B777-300ER and B777-200LR as of 1996?
Nice find.

More MD-12 stuff:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1061.0/highlight,md-12.html
 

chornedsnorkack

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
chornedsnorkack said:
Consider the final, 1996 specifications of MD-XX:

http://md-eleven.net/MD11-MD12-undeveloped-models

What are interesting to see here:
snip
sferrin said:
chornedsnorkack said:
The engine thrust was only slightly increased compared to MD-11. 62 000 to 65 000 pounds is just 5 % increase,
Nice find.
More MD-12 stuff:
And yet more stuff
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5498.0.html

MD-11 was already supposed to have 65 000 pound engines: Trent 600.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

this McDonnell Douglas called Douglas D-3304-2.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890017471_1989017471.pdf
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

here is many DC-9 super 80 aircraft projects,and McDonnell Douglas Model
D-3203-29.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19820010328_1982010328.pdf
 

Attachments

Antonio

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,387
Reaction score
77
Thanks hesham for this great pdf about DC-9 development

My contribution is this MD-XX colour art
 

Attachments

circle-5

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
72
Here's a picture of the D-974C-6, a big 1967 airliner concept with 6 engines and a GTOW of 1.2 million pounds. The logos on the base and the tail fin are from Douglas, with McDonnell added to the fuselage. The cargo version of this airplane is described in Giants of the Sky by Bill Gunston, on page 289. The smaller Boeing 747 made more sense at the time, as airports probably would have had a hard time dealing with typical D-974C-6 passenger loads.
 

Attachments

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,713
Reaction score
1,434
The cargo version of D-974 is also briefly described by Rene Francillon in McDonnell-Douglas Aicraft Since 1920: Vol 1 P.616, with a basic 3 view drawing.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,170
Reaction score
34
Looks as though they thought of the crew-rest cabin idea too - see the upper pair of windows just in front of the vertical tail. Market-wise, of course, this would have fit in above the DC-10 where a 747-class jet would have competed.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

also McDonnell Douglas/Douglas division D-3300.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19880004775_1988004775.pdf
 

Attachments

Apophenia

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,313
Reaction score
367
Interesting find Hesham. The D-3300 is usually portrayed as a T-tailed aircraft.

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=641&page=112 D-3300 with T-tail

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1982/1982%20-%202423.html

D-3300 - Single aisle, 141,000 lb (64,000 kg) TO weight, below 85,000 lb (30,636 kg) empty weight, 1860 nm (3420 km) range, 150 pax, 21,000-22,000 lb st engine

In 1983, Flight comments that the D-3300 was not yet a firm project and it appearance before 1990 was unlikely. MDC said that 48 to 52 months would be needed to develop and certify the D-3300 after its new-technology engine emerged (but, of course, Airbus had already given the go-ahead for its 150-seat A320 by this stage).

MDC was also looking for risk-sharing partners in Japan (Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, and Fuji being considered).

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1983/1983%20-%200738.html
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Thank you my dear Apophenia very much,

and here is the MD-XX was given the designation D-3308-4.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960010546_1996110546.pdf
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

the McDonnell Dougals D-3304-2 airliner project.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930021242_1993021242.pdf
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

here is initial drawing to the McDonnell Dougals D-3243 airliner.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19880019599_1988019599.pdf
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,883
Reaction score
1,672
Hi,

When I spoke about the MD SF-1107 supersonic fighter,I forget the
MD D-3233 SST airliner aircraft;

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5533.0/highlight,sf-1107.html

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890017470_1989017470.pdf
 

Attachments

chornedsnorkack

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
59
Reaction score
0
circle-5 said:
Here's a picture of the D-974C-6, a big 1967 airliner concept with 6 engines and a GTOW of 1.2 million pounds. The logos on the base and the tail fin are from Douglas, with McDonnell added to the fuselage. The cargo version of this airplane is described in Giants of the Sky by Bill Gunston, on page 289. The smaller Boeing 747 made more sense at the time, as airports probably would have had a hard time dealing with typical D-974C-6 passenger loads.
Could someone give the specifications of wingspan, length and fuselage cross-section?
 
Top