Twin-Engine MD-11

In the late 1980s, there were three major widebody airliner programs on the horizon. Airbus was putting together the A330/A340 family, which entered service in 1993, Boeing was working on the slightly larger 777, which entered service in 1995, and McDonnell Douglas was working on the MD-11, a relatively modest upgrade of the DC-10 that entered service in late 1990. As we all know, the MD-11 and A340 attempted to differentiate themselves by having more than two engines and long range in a market that was just starting to accept twins for long-haul flights. Boeing's late start on the 777 (decision made in 1988) compared to Airbus and McDD allowed them to fully commit to the intercontinental twin concept.

The question here is fourfold:
1. Did McDonnell Douglas have the resources to develop a twin-engine variant of the DC-10 to offer as the MD-11?
My initial response to this question would be 'no,' considering the fact that McDD only spent $500 million on a plane that was supposed to compete with multi-billion dollar cleen sheet designs. However, I don't know enough about McDD's financial situation in the late 1980s to give a better answer.

2. What would the twin-engine MD-11 have looked like?
IMO, we would see something about DC-10 size with the same engine options as the A330. A stretch to OTL MD-11 length might be possible (later, if everything works out), but it would probably reduce range to something on the order of 4,000-4,500 nmi. I think the overall shape would be something like the A300 (kind of stumpy looking).

3. Would the twin-engine MD-11 be competitive?
A DC-10 sized plane would slot in below the 777-200, but the 777 was being used for one-to-one replacements of the DC-10, so airlines might not be looking for straight DC-10 replacements. The effects of going with a twinjet over a trijet would mean abandoning the ULR market to the A340, which happened OTL when the MD-11 couldn't meet its range goals. Overall, I can see up to a doubling of the total MD-11 market, mostly taken from Airbus, but not enough to make a significant difference for McDD.

4. What would the secondary market for twin-engine MD-11s look like?
About 60% of the MD-11s built are still in service, all as freight aircraft (some were built as passenger planes and some as freight planes). Without the OTL MD-11's long range, would airlines like FedEx Express and UPS Airlines still use as many. Considering how common A300s still are in the United States as freight airliners, I would say that a twin-engine MD-11 would probably be quite popular.
 
The USAF's KC-10 tanker is a DC-10 variant. A MD-11 tanker variant might be possible, if the USAF is looking to replace even more KC-135s. I don't know if a MD-11 could compete for other military roles.
 
The USAF's KC-10 tanker is a DC-10 variant. A MD-11 tanker variant might be possible, if the USAF is looking to replace even more KC-135s. I don't know if a MD-11 could compete for other military roles.
For comparison, the empty weights of a number of tankers:
KC-135: 45 tons
KC-10: 110 tons
KC-767: 80 tons
A330 MRTT: 120 tons

The twin-engine MD-11 would probably come in around 100 tons OEW (230 - 250 tons MTOW), based on the removal of the third engine, simplification of the tail, and removal of reinforcement the OTL MD-11 needed for its large fuel load. It would be bigger than the KC-135 and KC-767 and smaller than the KC-10 and A330 MRTT, though its fuel load would probably come close to the Airbus.
 
Top