Boeing 707 and DC-8s…

Former Eastern, Conair, Atlanta Skylarks Boeing 720.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Atlanta-Skylarks/Boeing-720-025/1239549/M/
Probably a Stansted regular in the 70’s.

Very many thanks for that link. We used to handle that aircraft in its a/s Conair colours and then Atlanta Skylarks. Another of those travel clubs that used to drop in were the 707s of Denver Ports Of Call. Atlanta Skylarks often used a Boeing 727-100 on transatlantic trips.

Former Eastern, Conair, Atlanta Skylarks Boeing 720.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Atlanta-Skylarks/Boeing-720-025/1239549/M/
Probably a Stansted regular in the 70’s.

Looks like an early ‘coal burner’ 720 to me but very difficult to judge on that image.

there is an abandoned 707 at Nagpur, India. Seems like in OK condition.

Is there also one at Tegel? Ex-Air India IIRC. There’s also an abandoned ex-BA one in Africa, still in British Airtours colours.

Anyone got any photo’s of this BA 707 still in Africa?

The video quality is not so good, but this is the final flight of the South African Air Force Boeing 707 in 2007.

SAAF Boeing 707 Delivery to Air Force Museum, Swartkop

I used ramp 707s and 720s in another life at STN. Back in the mid 80s a Captain on the 720s for a Danish airline a/s Conair once told me that he had flown 707s previous to joining a/s Conair and he described the 720B by comparison as the ‘sports’ model as it was a fair bit quicker than the 707 and its handling in the air ‘snappier’. As they operated only to CPH from STN and therefore were fairly light on fuel, the take offs on the 720 had to be seen to be believed, even with a full pax load. Our on airfield maintenance company Aviation Traders pulled in 707s from all over the globe along with 720s that were usually VIP/Govt. machines at that time. The DC8 was a frequent visitor to STN in Srs50, 61,62 and my favourite the -63 whose take off sound I shall always remember…….almost as good as a fully loaded IL62! 😉 BTW KC135s ‘a dime a dozen’ at Mildenhall.

I saw a KC-135 taking off from Libreville (FOOL,LBV) the other day.

Nice to see a Lufthansa Boeing 707 still knocking about in May 2010, link below:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Lufthansa/Boeing-707-430/1703181/L/&sid=80bf1ececd6198e04a3bcc8dae8bb15a

It’s beautiful. Like a classic sixties/seventies vast V8-powered American car, it is much cooler – if that word can be applied to an airliner – than any modern offering.

Is there also one at Tegel? Ex-Air India IIRC. There’s also an abandoned ex-BA one in Africa, still in British Airtours colours.

Is that the last Rolls Royce powered 707 in the world? The British Airways one at Cosford was chopped up! Well done Lufthansa!

Nice to see a Lufthansa Boeing 707 still knocking about in May 2010, link below:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Lufthansa/Boeing-707-430/1703181/L/&sid=80bf1ececd6198e04a3bcc8dae8bb15a

Anyway, getting back to the question…John Travolta’ 707 ‘coupe’ is still active ,isn’t it?…Does the sound-deadening make much difference to the engine note?

Here’s a 720 with the original note

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY-pMoJP550

I also recall that 747 research was “Lost” in the piggy-back-shuttle concept.

Jeez…we just went over this a couple of months ago…must be an Airbus misinformation campaign. 🙂

To be brief: The 747 was planned LONG before the shuttle.

The Shuttle was not okayed for production until 1972…and the 747 ff. in 1969.

And tell me why anyone would spend that kind of R&D money for two shuttle carriers?
The USSR didn’t even do that..it just stretched and hung extra engines on an AN-124 to make the AN-225.
If the 747 wen’t available, NASA would have acquired a C-5 from the USAF.

In fact both Shuttle carriers are used airliners, the first a -100 was ex-American Airlines and bought in 1972, the second is a -100SR and is ex-JAL bought in 1988. Again if the design were made for the NASA shuttle fleet, I really don’t think they wouold have bought two retired airliners.
No the earliest genesis for the 747 was in a proposal for what became the C-5.
Obviously, Boeing (and Douglas) lost the competition and developed the 747 on its own money
(from commercial banks due with interest unlike some recent Airbus deals).
Since the Boeing proposal was very much a paper plane…and differed greatly from the eventual 747…you can’t say Boeing got much benefit from the taxpayers for the 747 development.

BTW: The 707 prototype, the 367-80 was privately funded long before there was a requirement for jet tankers. The aircraft flew before Boeing got any AF funds.
Yes, Boeing used some 135 tooling on early 707s, but it had to pay the government for it.

Anyway, getting back to the question…John Travolta’ 707 ‘coupe’ is still active ,isn’t it?…Does the sound-deadening make much difference to the engine note?

You beat me to it, although my answer would not be so detailed.

The fact remains however that a very significant lump of the design costs (And the remaining common tooling) for the 707 were “Lost” in the research/NRC for the tanker. Boeing benefited commercially on the back of the US taxpayer.
I also recall that 747 research was “Lost” in the piggy-back-shuttle concept.

Boeing forget this when they accuse Airbus of sponging off the French Government.

707 vs KC-135

The 707 and KC-135 were going to be built on the same tooling with the same width fuselage but the sales success of the DC-8 forced Boeing to increase the width( by 5 inches?) and length of the domestic 707-120 launch model to compete. The 707-120 and KC-135 wing were the same planform but the whole structure of the 707 was built in the conservative 2024 series alloy (better fatigue life) whereas the KC-135 used the higher strength but less fatigue resistant 7…series alloy , so its fair to say they are a completely different aircraft
In the 1980s KC-135E refurbishment the Air Guard rebuilt scores of KC-135s with JT-3D fan engines pods/pylons, tails, and galleys from retired airline 707s so presumably those KC-135R tankers re engined a second time still contain 707 components. There was also a major wing rebuild program changing the skins and some components to the more conservative (but heavier) 2024 series alloy , I think.

The Airliner Cafe website’s 707 guide is comprehensive but doesn’t get into the KC-135….the prototype 367-80 had the same planform 707-120/KC-135 wing but a shorter fuselage with the diameter of the old 367/377 Stratotanker/Stratocruiser. I would say there were only 2 basic wings…the707-120 domestic (modified for the 720 with leading edge improvements and lighter skins which had to be replaced with heavier skins later!) and the 707-320/420 intercontinental with bigger span ( later wingtip and various tweaks leading to the -320C Adv , E-3, E-8 wing)

http://www.airlinercafe.com/page.php?id=72

I would have said they were more akin to the B720.

IIRC…and without my Boeing Aircraft Putnam’s to guide me…the 720 differed from the 707 because of its wing.

C-135s have narrower fuselages than 707s…but have similar wings.

Somewhere…the C-135s are called (the original) 717s.:D

Just read that you don’t have to hurry to Geilenkirchen. The 17 AWACS stationed there have been grounded due to corrosion on the landing gear. It is not known for how long they will stay grounded.

Think the DC8s will be a thing of the past at Filton now too with the demise of MK