On a night shift monday and was speaking to this puppy:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1169483/M/
Coming in from the US to PIK, I didn’t notice at first that it was a 707. I saw the type on the flight progress strip and it took a while for it to register that it was a 707. (It was a night shift after all) Anyway, I thought little about it until the following day when I happened to look out of my bedroom window and see it departing in the distance. Fantastic sight 😀
To the point, does anyone know anything about this aircraft and why it might have been visiting Prekkers last Monday? It appears to have been used by assorted rock bands in the past so I would guess it has a private jet interior and is leased to anyone who can afford it. :confused:
By: Manston Airport - 3rd August 2007 at 16:55
Ah you gotta look after the young ‘uns on the forums…;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eagles
Might I suggest you view the movie ‘Almost Famous’ a popular parody of The Eagles on tour and contains a hilarious ‘tour plane’ related scene…:D
Well I do know some 70’s Bands but not these.:o
😮
I’ll pretend I didn’t read that!
Paul
Well us Young ones 😀
James
By: Newforest - 3rd August 2007 at 09:26
Do winglets on a 737 type aircraft make it more fuel efficient than an A320?
What happened to Airbus’s trial of winglets?
I think your question is answered here.
An Airbus A320 of Air Blue in Karachi.In 2006, Airbus tested three styles of winglet, intended to counteract the wing’s induced drag and wingtip vortices more effectively than the previous wingtip fence. Adoption of the new winglets was expected to reduce fuel consumption by one to two percent. The first design type to be tested was developed by Airbus and was based on work done by the AWIATOR program. The second type of winglet used a more blended design and was created by Winglet Technology LLC, a company based in Wichita, Kansas as well as the third type.
Two airplanes were used in the flight test evaluation campaign. F-WWBA, the first A320 produced, has been retained by Airbus for testing, and was fitted with both the first type and second type of winglets.[6][7] JetBlue Airways provided the second aircraft, retrofitted by Airbus with both types of winglets.[8][9]
Despite the anticipated efficiency gains and development work, Airbus announced that the new winglets will not be offered to customers, claiming that the weight of the modifications required would negate any aerodynamic benefits.[10] In addition, the change in forces from winglets add additional stress to the wing which would require long-term study to determine if structural integrity is compromised.
By: cloud_9 - 3rd August 2007 at 09:20
That might be a nice feature…anything to reduce fuel consumption on jets with the old technology engines would be welcome.
Agreed. Especially important during a time of rising fuel prices.
Do winglets on a 737 type aircraft make it more fuel efficient than an A320?
What happened to Airbus’s trial of winglets?
By: PMN - 2nd August 2007 at 23:36
Who are The Eagles?:confused: 😮
James
😮
I’ll pretend I didn’t read that!
Paul
By: Ren Frew - 2nd August 2007 at 23:14
Who are The Eagles?:confused: 😮
James
Ah you gotta look after the young ‘uns on the forums…;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eagles
Might I suggest you view the movie ‘Almost Famous’ a popular parody of The Eagles on tour and contains a hilarious ‘tour plane’ related scene…:D
By: Manston Airport - 2nd August 2007 at 22:29
Woooo hoooo… We’re almost there
Ohhhh Noooo… I’ve fallen off my chair
Stop this plane and we’ll make it I swear
Woooo hoooo… Livin’ on a prayer…I’ll stop now…
I wonder if that’s the 707 also used by The Eagles on their recent-ish tour?
Paul
Who are The Eagles?:confused: 😮
James
By: Newforest - 2nd August 2007 at 22:14
But somewhere I read that to retrofit a 737 with winglets cost something like $500,000. A jet flying 12 hours a day could make it pay for itself, but a charter or freight 707, I’m not sure if they’d ever fly that much to make it cost effective.
Close, anything up to $800,000!:eek:
If winglets are so good, you may wonder why all 737s don’t have them. In fact 85% of all new 737s are now built with winglets, particularly the 800 and 900 series and of course all BBJs. It comes down to cost versus benefits. Winglets cost about $725,000USD and take about 1 week to install which costs an extra $25-80,000USD. Once fitted, they add 170-235kg (375-518lbs) to the weight of the aircraft, depending upon whether they were installed at production or a retrofit. The fuel cost of carrying this extra weight will take some flying time each sector to recover, although this is offset by the need to carry less fuel because of the increased range. In simple terms, if your average sector length is short (less than one hour) you wont get much the benefit from winglets – unless you need any of the other benefits such as reduced noise or you regularly operate from obstacle limited runways.
By: PMN - 2nd August 2007 at 21:17
With an album named ‘Slippery When Wet’ you’d think they’d have seen that one coming…?:rolleyes:
Woooo hoooo… We’re almost there
Ohhhh Noooo… I’ve fallen off my chair
Stop this plane and we’ll make it I swear
Woooo hoooo… Livin’ on a prayer…
I’ll stop now…
I wonder if that’s the 707 also used by The Eagles on their recent-ish tour?
Paul
By: J Boyle - 2nd August 2007 at 21:03
Also developed and tested on this aircraft were 8ft 10in winglets which increased lift and reduced drag with a corresponding 7% improvement in overall fuel economy.
That might be a nice feature…anything to reduce fuel consumption on jets with the old technology engines would be welcome.
But somewhere I read that to retrofit a 737 with winglets cost something like $500,000. A jet flying 12 hours a day could make it pay for itself, but a charter or freight 707, I’m not sure if they’d ever fly that much to make it cost effective.
By: Newforest - 2nd August 2007 at 16:41
As related on another web site (Pp), 707’s are now hush kitted to be Stage 3 compliant.
There were a few hushkit options developed for the 707. The test aircraft used to certify this one was also equipped with winglets and was demonstrated at the Farnborough and Paris Air Shows in the late 1990s. It may have been the only 707 with winglets. Very few 707s have these hushkits but not sure exactly how many.
Excerpt from another site referring to this hushkit modification:
Most operators which retained B707s throughout the 1990s were eventually obliged to hush-kit their aircraft in order to continue operating under new noise restrictions. During the early 1990s Comtran International Inc developed Q-707 nacelle/hush-kits, featuring a lengthened intake cowling and extended exaust tail pipe which reduced noise sufficiently to meet Stage 2 limitations. From 1996, Quiet Skies Inc, in conjunction with Burbank Aeronautical Corp, further advanced this concept to produce Stage 3 compliant hush-kits which B707-3J6B N717QS demonstrated publicly at the 1998 Farnborough Air Show. Also developed and tested on this aircraft were 8ft 10in winglets which increased lift and reduced drag with a corresponding 7% improvement in overall fuel economy.
[Edited 2007-07-12 00:40:25]
By: J Boyle - 2nd August 2007 at 16:16
It looks to have been “Hush kitted” (check the differenced betwen it and the Columbian example shown).
Any details on that mod….and is it now Stage III compliant?
By: egpx - 2nd August 2007 at 15:35
With an album named ‘Slippery When Wet’ you’d think they’d have seen that one coming…?:rolleyes:
Pour souls, their permed hair must have ended up a right mess :diablo:
By: Ren Frew - 2nd August 2007 at 12:05
According to the a.net pictures, she was the one involved in the Bon Jovi overrun.
With an album named ‘Slippery When Wet’ you’d think they’d have seen that one coming…?:rolleyes:
By: egpx - 2nd August 2007 at 09:12
This was probably the plane that was involved in the Bon Jovi ‘incident’ last January 2006. Glad to see that there was no permanent damage.
According to the a.net pictures, she was the one involved in the Bon Jovi overrun.
By: egpx - 2nd August 2007 at 09:11
No the best looking 707 has to be this http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1239728/L/ and JT 707 and the other Qantas one:D BTW is EGPK Prestwick?
James
Yup, I sometimes speak ICAO codes rather than IATA ones. It’s a work thing.
By: Newforest - 2nd August 2007 at 07:43
On a night shift monday and was speaking to this puppy:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1169483/M/
To the point, does anyone know anything about this aircraft and why it might have been visiting Prekkers last Monday? It appears to have been used by assorted rock bands in the past so I would guess it has a private jet interior and is leased to anyone who can afford it. :confused:
This was probably the plane that was involved in the Bon Jovi ‘incident’ last January 2006. Glad to see that there was no permanent damage.
By: Manston Airport - 1st August 2007 at 22:55
She has got to be the best looking 707 flying.
No the best looking 707 has to be this http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1239728/L/ and JT 707 and the other Qantas one:D BTW is EGPK Prestwick?
James
By: lukeylad - 1st August 2007 at 22:14
She has got to be the best looking 707 flying.
Owned by New york based company Lowa Air.
As you said she is used by rock bands often as there tour plane. She spent a good part of this first half of this year in Europe last landed in the Uk at Luton in March i think.
I quote from an air traffic controller in the USA Last year ” We have you down as a 707 please comfirm” “Roger that tower we are a 707 ” Tower “God your beautiful!”
Sign In
August 1, 2007 at 9:13 pm