Coolest Large Planes?
Discussion
hammo19 said:
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-16.8789726,145.7470038,184m/data=!3m1!1e3http://www.cairnspost.com.au/news/cairns/cairns-ai...
motomk said:
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-16.8789726,145.74...
http://www.cairnspost.com.au/news/cairns/cairns-ai...
What a sad position....it wasn't there when I flew to Cairns, mind you that was a few years ago now.http://www.cairnspost.com.au/news/cairns/cairns-ai...
Eric Mc said:
I go with what the manufacturer decided.
It's a bit like the Boeing 707 and 720 - superficially very similar but under the skin quite different.
I thought the 720 was very much a 707, optimised for short-haul, and was only launched as the 720 as one of the launch customer US carriers had vowed not to buy 707s?It's a bit like the Boeing 707 and 720 - superficially very similar but under the skin quite different.
They are related no doubt - but the wings, undercarriage and fuselage structures had been beefed up considerably to allow more take offs and landings as they were intended for mid range internal US routes.
The KC-135 is another quite different aeroplane from the same generic family - the daddy of which was the 367-80.
Boeing labelled the types -
707
717 (C-135/KC-135 etc)
720
The customer you might be thinking of is probably United, which was one of the launch customers of the rival Douglas DC-8 - but I wasn't aware that they had vowed not to operate 707s. They did fly 720s until the early 1970s. A number of airlines operated 707s and DC-8s at the same time
The KC-135 is another quite different aeroplane from the same generic family - the daddy of which was the 367-80.
Boeing labelled the types -
707
717 (C-135/KC-135 etc)
720
The customer you might be thinking of is probably United, which was one of the launch customers of the rival Douglas DC-8 - but I wasn't aware that they had vowed not to operate 707s. They did fly 720s until the early 1970s. A number of airlines operated 707s and DC-8s at the same time
Eric Mc said:
They are related no doubt - but the wings, undercarriage and fuselage structures had been beefed up considerably to allow more take offs and landings as they were intended for mid range internal US routes.
The KC-135 is another quite different aeroplane from the same generic family - the daddy of which was the 367-80.
Boeing labelled the types -
707
717 (C-135/KC-135 etc)
720
The customer you might be thinking of is probably United, which was one of the launch customers of the rival Douglas DC-8 - but I wasn't aware that they had vowed not to operate 707s. They did fly 720s until the early 1970s. A number of airlines operated 707s and DC-8s at the same time
Thanks Eric, yes, it was United I think. There was an article about 720s in Aviation(?) magazine a few months back, which is where my recollection came from. It was exactly that, they had ordered DC-8s and the president of United stated they wouldn't operate 707s, presumably as the DC-8 was being marketed as superior. So when they wanted the new type of 707 they requested Boeing rebranded the model.The KC-135 is another quite different aeroplane from the same generic family - the daddy of which was the 367-80.
Boeing labelled the types -
707
717 (C-135/KC-135 etc)
720
The customer you might be thinking of is probably United, which was one of the launch customers of the rival Douglas DC-8 - but I wasn't aware that they had vowed not to operate 707s. They did fly 720s until the early 1970s. A number of airlines operated 707s and DC-8s at the same time
Boeing had thought of calling the 720 the Boeing 707-720 - which was in line with the various subvariants of the 707 they were planning i.e. 707-120, 320 and 420. But I had always read that they decided to drop the 707 prefix on the 720s because it was significantly different to the basic 707 structure. That is precisely why they allocated 717 to the C-135 family - although there never were civil variants of the 717.
Decades later, because the "717" designation was not well known outside of Boeing, they used it again to rename the McDonnell Douglas DC-9/MD-80/90 family when they took over McDonnell Douglas in 1997.
Decades later, because the "717" designation was not well known outside of Boeing, they used it again to rename the McDonnell Douglas DC-9/MD-80/90 family when they took over McDonnell Douglas in 1997.
RacingPete said:
Now if you take an airliner and make it into a big tanker and make it refuel a Blackbird... The KC-747
Here's an interesting article about it http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-worlds-only-k...RacingPete said:
Now if you take an airliner and make it into a big tanker and make it refuel a Blackbird... The KC-747
First thing that strikes me about that photo is how small the engines are on that 747 compared to say the giant lumps on modern aaircraft such as the Dreamliner and A380. Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff