End of an Era?

Many 737 problems can be traced back to that squatty landing gear designed a long, long time ago when the kind of growth that evolved was not foreseen.

 

Exactly! The 707 series suffered from it and it was a lesson learned. From the 747 thru the 787 a lengthy LG was on them. From what I remember, the weight of the long oleo strut was the driver to keep them shorter on the 707 and 737. It didn't matter on the 727 since there were no struts and engines under the wing.

 

Don't forget the DC-8.

 

I think the desire to use airstairs to embark/disembark was a contributing factor on the 737 as well. There was a joke that the Germans invented the original 737 with the engine placement on the Me 262!

 

The DC-8 did it right. The inverted wing section at the root was another lesson that Boeing learned from the DC-8.

 

There were commercial DC-8 versions flying long after the 707 series of airliners were retired.

 

Yes... I flew on United re-engined and lengthened DC-8's for years to/from Denver...

 

I made several trips across the pond on Stretch 8s that were military charters.

 

I see this one a few times a year. Can probably be converted to twin engine.

N787RR

Image Unavailable, Please Login

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Why not? She already is set up for that on one side. Wonder if that took a little extra rudder on takeoff.

 

Military aircraft and tooling are scrapped for political reasons. SR-71 tooling was destroyed by order to ensure the F-16 became the continental defense fighter. It was a ridiculous decision, but one cannot have a rice bowl threatened by common sense. Commercial aircraft and tooling are destroyed by bean counters. There is not an accountant alive who wants real property sitting on the books not making money - or worse, costing money when it can be written off.

 

SR-71 tooling decisions had nothing to do with F-16 production. Not much common between a Mach 3.5 reconnaissance platform and a Mach 2 fighter bomber.

 

I'd like to see them convert that aircraft into a twin-engined one, using two of the most powerful turbofans currently out there, to see how it would fly.

 

Thanks for the Reg Number. Lots of images online for that beauty.

For example:

https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/359136/n787rr-rolls-royce-boeing-747-200/

 

Maybe, but how would it fly on a single engine...??? ETOPS?

 

Have to disagree there Taz... The successful integration and launch of AIM-47 Falcons (predecessor of the Phoenix) from the YF-12 resulted in an order for 90+ aircraft by USAF for the F-12B. Think about it. If you can reach out and touch the Bear bomber at Mach 3+ before it is in range to launch cruise missiles, it is much smarter than waiting to engage multiple targets. Sec Def McNamara intervened multiple times and got the program killed. Lockheed kept proposing the concept for continental defense - but that was very unpopular in the Pentagon. The tooling was ordered destroyed in 1968 and the "Fighter Mafia" got running with the new programs in '69. The reason I even made the comment is that my boss - who was a lifer at ADP Aero - never got over it. He would get depressed telling me the story - over and over.

 

What does it have to do with the F16? The AIM 54 Phoenix? That's not an F16 related missile. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

No problem. That picture is amazing. Great sunrises and sunsets in AZ for sure. I remember seeing N787RR for the first time 2 years ago this month when I was in Tucson for a weekend. I was wondering what it was from afar and then the huge RR logo on the tail gave it away...the F16s (dozens of them) on the other end of the airfield had caught my attention first. We were landing from west to east and my left window seat saw all of them sitting there looking incredible. Hopefully that 747 eventually gets put to the Pima museum alongside the 787 Dreamliner already there (I think the 2nd one ever made?).

 

Nothing. Its not about the missile. It was about "higher ups" ordering tooling destroyed so that a demonstrated CONOP could not threaten a new and massive rice bowl (the new fighters coming down the pipe).

 

AB- Sorry, but I do not buy that story, regardless of your boss' war stories. YF-12s and F-16s did not compete for anything and the timeframes do not match at all. The F-16 was bought as an F-4 replacement, never as a continental defense weapon. Originally an LWF competitor, USAF and General Dynamics morphed it into a fighter bomber, never originally as an interceptor except as a triple DOC capability much later.

 

Bumping an old thread. YouTube video recently posted with a lot of info and footage on N787RR.

edit: you can see in the video the #2 engine throttle lever is orange. Notice its position on takeoff and landing. Looks at about 80% on takeoff and 0% (idle) on landing. Someone correct me if I'm wrong as I don't know throttle position percentages and am just guessing on that number based on the others next to it. Apparently they idle the engine on landing as it has to idle for at least 5 minutes to shutdown and they don't want to wait on the ground for it.

 

Unless they are parking on the runway any taxi will take at least 5 minutes.

 

TUS is a very small airport and the pilot said himself it takes them under 5 min time to get to where they park after landing. Starts @15 min mark in video.