707 Vs DC8

[AvroGuy]

So here is my question, why is it that the DC-8 has survived as a cargo carrier in the states but the 707 hasn't?

 

[GRAAB HIRBOUBI]

707 / Dc8

If you look at the fusealage, you will see that the bottom slopes gently up to the tailcone on the 707. The DC8 goes more straight back and has a sharper slope towards the tail cone.

More cubic cargo space under the main floor on the DC8 than the 707. Granted I don't think its that much but thats what a DC8 Capt at UPS told me about 15 years ago.

Probably wrong but I have heard this from more than 1 source.

Former AVRO Guy Now SAAB Slave

 

[AirCobra]

DC-8 Series 61 and Super 72 are larger than the largest 707 model the 320C. Airlines like Delta and United had already modified DC-8's with new more powerful and fuel efficient GE engines by the time cargo companies bought them, no such civil mod for the 707. The lower deck of the DC-8 has a container system making loading/unloading quicker.

 

[J3CubDriver]

It's a Douglas. Look at all the DC-8's, DC-9, DC-10's still flying. Douglas overbuilt everything, plus kept it simple. All cables. The inside of an 8 looks like a harp. Cables everywhere. The 707 or early 737 weren't built as tough. The early Boeing had skin problems. The DC-8's days are numbered now. They are getting very expensive to C check. Over a million dollar these days. One tough plane.

 

[DC8 Flyer]

DC8s rule, Boeings drool, nuff said.

 

[hawkerjet]

It's a Douglas. Look at all the DC-8's, DC-9, DC-10's still flying. Douglas overbuilt everything, plus kept it simple. All cables. The inside of an 8 looks like a harp. Cables everywhere. The 707 or early 737 weren't built as tough. The early Boeing had skin problems. The DC-8's days are numbered now. They are getting very expensive to C check. Over a million dollar these days. One tough plane.

I once heard a DC-8 captain refer to them as the Douglas Cable Company. One pretty tough bird.

 

[landlover]

best nickname for a DC-8, "the ocho" courtesy of the movie dodgeball.

 

[EMBATP]

707

of course it could have something to do with the usaf buying buttloads of 707/720s off the used market when they were doing the kc-135 e mods.....

 

[Waldom]

The DC-8 was designed with a taller landing gear, so the fuselage could be stretched in later versions. The stretched versions hold 18 pallets or igloos.

The biggest B-707 (the -320) only holds 12 pallets for essentially the same operating costs. That airplane was designed with a shorter landing gear than the Douglas. If its fuselage was stretched as long as that of the DC-8-61/71 or -63/73, the tail would strike the runway at 4 or 5 degrees nose up attitude and the airplane could not take off. Boeing did learn from there mistakes, however. Ever notice how tall the landing gear is on the 757 and later designs?

One other advantage the Douglas product has is the fact that its systems are designed with stone-ax technology. Simple equals reliable and long-lasting. Douglas designers did not go the elegant and sophisticated engineering route: they built it like a locomotive.

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

Have to agree with Waldom: the DC8 could be stretched whereas the 707 couldn't without hitting the rear end on takeoff. There's also too much electrical stuff on the 707 - all very nice when new and working properly but over time the cable systems of the DC8 have repeatedly taken a licking and kept on ticking.

In more recent years restrictions on approach flap extension and the prohibiting of inflight reverse (to prevent airframe fatigue) have made the DC8 a bit of a handful in the descent planning department. It'll probably be the cost of maintenance, especially C checks, that finally kill the aircraft off.