December 4, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Saw this over on “Airliners” an as the 5th pod is a regular subject hear I thought you might like to see it.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/East-African-Airways/Vickers-Super-VC10/1822833/M/
Rgds Cking
By: bloodnok - 6th December 2010 at 18:30
CF6 and RB211 were of modular design, where (N1) compressor first stage (the big fan) could be removed in the hangar. The rump was then of manageable bulk to fit the cube of CL-44D/707-320F/DC-8F.
If you take the LP fan off a RB211 it doesn’t make it any smaller as it sits inside the fan case.
You take the nose cowl off it to make it shorter though.
By: alertken - 6th December 2010 at 10:54
The first, 1970, civil big fan, JT9D, was hugely unreliable. There was zero big cube civil airfreight capacity, so the payload penalty of an extra pod was the price to shift spare QECs.
CF6 and RB211 were of modular design, where (N1) compressor first stage (the big fan) could be removed in the hangar. The rump was then of manageable bulk to fit the cube of CL-44D/707-320F/DC-8F.
When wide-body population grew, lessors came up with “insurance”/access deals, and common operators came up with reciprocal pool schemes: crossroad sites like LHR would house a max-neutral QEC as “get-you-home” for any Member, who would then send it back as palletised freight, even under-his-own-belly.
By: pagen01 - 6th December 2010 at 09:45
Agree with mrtotty, but also aircraft were far more reliant on all engines running back then, these days the built in over capacity in an airliner to cope with losing an engine in flight is far greater.
By: Arabella-Cox - 6th December 2010 at 06:20
I was going to suggest that the reason current aircraft do not have fifth pods is because of enhanced engine reliability now – notwithstanding the recent RR events.
It must have been much more likely that aircraft engines in the sixties could go bang, necessitating a spare engine at short notice.
By: PeeDee - 5th December 2010 at 23:14
OK….
5th pod aircraft
707
DC-8
VC-10
747
4th pod aircraft
Tristar
DC-10
8th pod aircraft or is it 10th pod?:D
B-36
Are there any more?
I don’t think that the A340 or A380 have the facility.Rgds Cking
The Hercules, like I said. I’m sure the Saturn AW Herc. used to bring engines for the Saturn DC8’s at Manc.
They are generally not needed now because RR etc. know what every engine in service is doing anywhere in the world……and usually have replacements waiting for the A/c to arrive. Obviously, not for catastophic failures like recently.
By: Cking - 5th December 2010 at 22:08
OK….
5th pod aircraft
707
DC-8
VC-10
747
4th pod aircraft
Tristar
DC-10
8th pod aircraft or is it 10th pod?:D
B-36
Are there any more?
I don’t think that the A340 or A380 have the facility.
Rgds Cking
By: PeeDee - 5th December 2010 at 21:52
Many aircraft of 60’s 70’s had a Spare engine Pod option. It was indeed for carrying their own spares around.
I’m sure I’ve seen (At LHR) DC8’s, 707’s, Saturn AW Hercules (At Manchester).
I think I’ve seen that VC10 too, the photgraph sparked a memory chip in me. But it may be auto-suggestion, maybe I’ve seen that picture before.
By: pagen01 - 5th December 2010 at 21:05
It was originally specified after a request the Americans so they would buy the Ten, it was to allow them to carry a spare engine for the Conway powered 707’s coming into service on their fleets, but they as we know never bought them in the end, the Hydraulic system was also Skydrol as the USA Airlines specified that too.
Not sure why as the 707 could also carry its own ‘fifth’ spare engine pod. I can understand the US wanting the option for the VC-10 to carry spare engines for its own type, but would thay have seriously have brought the type?
Early 747s also capable of this aswel as the B-36 which could carry four spare engines in two pods.
By: Cking - 5th December 2010 at 20:54
I did hear that they considered fitting some sort of radar inside one of the pods and use the VC-10 as some sort of radar platform during the Falklands war. This may have been another Falklands “Urban myth” There were loads of them around at the time!
Rgds Cking
By: FLY.BUY - 5th December 2010 at 15:46
Interesting topic, Thanks for this guys…
By: TonyT - 5th December 2010 at 04:33
RAF VC10’s had the fittings to fit them under the STB wing, never saw the pod but I believed we had the odd one……. wasn’t needed as they had a freight door on the C1 and the only time I took one anywhere to change, ( Gander, Newfoundland outside in the winter!!!! ) we took it in a Herc with me and my mate to do the engine change….. that was it, two of us and an engine and toolkit.
It was originally specified after a request the Americans so they would buy the Ten, it was to allow them to carry a spare engine for the Conway powered 707’s coming into service on their fleets, but they as we know never bought them in the end, the Hydraulic system was also Skydrol as the USA Airlines specified that too.
See
By: Super Nimrod - 5th December 2010 at 00:54
Are they kept in the RAF inventory for use if required ?