Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'AviatorChat.com' started by Tcar, Jul 15, 2017.
707 flew for the first time today in 1954.
Remember it, Bob?
63 years ago. All the crews flying various KC-135 versions (not based on the 707, but close enough) are younger than the aircraft. USAF does still fly some 707 based aircraft, too, although there are plans to replace all of them.
For a second or two I was thinking that you had your dates wrong until I realized that you were referring to the 367-80, 707 prototype. I guess that you are more correct because the actual model number was 707. Yes, I do rememberer it because I was parked parallel to the runway. I had to dig a bit to find my painting of the event.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
The KC-135 (model 717) was the first production iteration of the -80 and was a bit larger and way heavier. The configuration and planform was used for the production of the 707 but that airplane was a bit larger in the upper lobe than the KC-135 and something like 25K pounds lighter. The structure was "shaved down" in places and there was no need for the heavy fuel tanks and battleship style structure. Outward appearance was the same except for the crease line on the 707 where the upper lobe met the waterline of the deck. And the upper tangent line where the constant section met the curvature of the cab was moved aft for 36". It's hard to believe that I worked on all that stuff and I am out to pasture and the airplanes are still going and that includes the B-52.
Sorry, I meant the prototype, the -80.
Thanks, didn't know those details... very interesting, Bob...
Yes, the B-52 is even older (2 years older or so).
Think I posted this before, but there is a B-52 pilot whose father was a B-52 pilot and also his grandfather was a B-52 pilot. Will they make 4 generations?????
I used to wonder why there were no 'stretched' 707's like the DC-8's that were sooo long.
I think you said that the shorter landing gear legs of the 707 precluded a stretch as it was too low to rotate with a longer fuselage. An early design decision that affected future development.
That's correct in every word. Same design glitch on the 737. Not so on the 747, 757, 767,777, and 787. Long landing gear legs are quite heavy and weight was a big issue on the 707-120.
I still remember traveling in one of those as a kid back in the late 70s.
Doesn't Travolta own one?
Isn't the 737-800 longer? I know they seat more on Southwest Airlines. Maybe something else changed?
Yup, an ex-Qantas 707-138.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
I don't know, Bob, the 737 has been stretched a number of times now...
My favorite 707 story is about the time that my family and I flew from SJU to JFK on Thanksgiving Day so that my mom could say goodbye to her brother, who was dying of cancer. Purely by chance, the 707 that Pan Am assigned for our flight was the Jet Clipper Mayflower! (Remember, this was on Thanksgiving Day.)
But it was shorter than the 707 to begin with.
It was sort of a 707 with a couple fuselage sections removed and shorter wings.
"Hey - lets go take the 707 out back for a spin!"
It all has to do with pitch angles from the main gear to the tail strike point. Nose gear lengthening is helping and I think that they are playing with a tricky landing gear now. Been looking at that for years.
My first flight in a 707 was a Pan-Am jet from Oslo, Norway to Ildewild Airport, NY in 1961. Chapped my family off because we were slated to come back on an ocean liner before USAF dictated all its overseas returns would be by airplane rather than ship. I was excited, though. Previously, all I had flown in was a C-47. A bit different in performance.
Good memories, Taz. In 1961 I had started working on 727 stuff, along with 720B, KC-135, 707-320, and on and on. I think about those hectic but enjoyable days a lot.
Interesting, since it was really the 707 and DC-8 that, for all intents and purposes, killed off the ocean liner business. Only Cunard continues to operate a true ocean liner (as distinguished from cruise ships) to this day.
OT: Interesting distinction I had never really thought about.. so I turned to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_liner for their take.. what's your distinction between the 2? Technical or design differences? or the people on board? The typical route taken?
I've only ever been on one, I guess a "cruise ship" for the Inside passage from AK.. and not crossing the Atlantic A-B as such.
Alex- Ocean liners were designed to deliver people and cargo, including cars, from major city A to major city B across major bodies of water in relatively short periods of time. Took one from New York to Oslo on the Stavangerfjord in 1958. Cruise ships are designed to entertain passengers while incidentally crossing bodies of water, often with frequent stops at ports of interest, and often ending up at the same place from which they departed.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Tex Johnston demonstrating Boeing's new airplane...
The way I look at it, ocean liners go from A to B. Cruise ships go from A to B (and usually C, D, E...) and then back to A. One is transportation, the other just a fun trip. But in their later years, ocean liners did some cruising as well, and the onboard amenities for both would be similar.
I was there and I have written about it several times how I was standing there with a movie camera shooting him coming in and when he pulled up and started the roll I was so shocked that I dropped the camera to my side and watched the whole thing. A guy standing beside me said that my comment about the airplane doing a roll was incorrect . After the second one going south, I asked him what was that was and there was no answer. I don't know why Tex referred to it as a chandelle because it was nothing like a chandelle, it was an aileron roll, all at one G. I knew one of the flight test engineers who was aboard and he said that if his eyes were closed he would never have known what happened. He said that Tex practiced it at altitude before he did it over the God Cup race course so it wasn't an impulsive event.
lol What a great story! How cool! I bet that was quite a jaw dropper! I thought it odd he referred to it as a chandelle as well. Just an aileron roll...but still...
I've got about 1500 hrs in the 135. 6 years in the Tennessee Air Guard....back in the 80's. Nothing like a Boeing. Even that one...
Good for you! I'm assuming that you refer to the KC-135. If so, what a great airplane! I had to dig to see if I had a small enough picture of the progenitor. I'll keep digging.