While Douglas had intentionally designed its DC-10 with abundant take-off power from its triple-engine configuration, for most U.S. domestic route segments and intra-European runs, really only the thrust of two turbofans was necessary. The newly-formed Airbus Industrie had reached this conclusion in the early 1970s and was proceeding with designing what would become the groundbreaking A300.
Meanwhile, engineering and sales staff at McDonnell-Douglas were considering how they might lighten and simplify the DC-10 to earn sales from smaller carriers with less “intercontinental” ambitions. By March 1973 they worked out a two-engine configuration that eliminated the central tail-mounted power plant, removed the extra fuel-management and hydraulic systems needed to operate it, and the extra structure in the vertical tail to mount it. The remaining two General Electric CF6 engines would provide more than adequate thrust for the lighter airframe, making the “DC-10 Twin” well-suited for routes such as New York – Florida, Chicago – California, UK – Italy, or intra-Japan shuttles.
For existing DC-10 operators, commonality for parts and crew would be a key selling point – foreshadowing the selling strategies Airbus and Boeing would successfully employ in the decades to come. For regional carriers, the simpler, shorter-range jumbo jet would represent a logical next step up from the 727’s capacity.
We have here concept artwork that McDD presented to North Central, likely in 1973. NC was enjoying its new DC-9-30 fleet and was ready to take the next step up with DC-9-50s – so the company’s sales staff were welcome visitors to Minneapolis. However, these conceptual paintings were as far as any proposal got: North Central’s route applications were simply too modest for the extreme capacity the DC-10 Twin would provide, and even the most optimistic traffic planner saw their prediction models ruined by the oil-price shock and price inflation of the mid-1970s.
Northwest, already taking the modified DC-10-40, let McDD know its fleet planning was well-balanced and did not need the added complexity of a sub-type, regardless of its commonality. This was the response of other DC-10 operators as well, and the DC-10 Twin was not pursued further.
If you use these photos, please credit the Northwest Airlines History Center – please also contact us to let us know how you’re using them and if we can be of further help!
