i believe thats correct:) i couldnt find anything to contradict it. Boeings site basically calls the MD11's tail a revolutionary design to decrease drag and improve fuel economy

anything i have put thats incorrect, please feel free to correct.

I will make a brave try ;D
The DC-10 is shorter than the MD-11, correct?
That would put the CoG closer (more aft) to the no2 engine and the horizontal stabilizers.

Now this of course doesn't mean the aircraft flies like a drunk pig, but in theory, that would make the aircraft sensitive to stabilizer pitch? Is the reason why the DC-10 had such a bad rep in the early stages? Because I believe Douglas came up with something to counteract with the sensitivity...

And this I know for a fact (the rest is just ramblings

)
The s-duct on the TriStar allows for a lower CoG, so the wing engines could be mounted farther away from the fuselage. hence turbulent air from the fuselage will pass by the engine inlets instead of going thru them.
And I have always been taught that longer fuselages needs SMALLER rudder surfaces, so the DC-10 would actually require a larger rudder to counter with the yawing ???
Anyway...this is fastly becoming an off topic subject
