DC8 and 707

[SAAB Driver]

CoPilot Doug brought up a good question concerning the L-1011. I see many operators using the DC8 but other than the Air Force Reserve/Guard, I don't see any 707's being used. Anyone know why that is?

 

[DirtyBeech]

Maybe the stretched 8's with the new fans are more efficient. Just a guess.

 

[Spooky 2]

Your absolutely right. The fact that there never was anything bigger than the B707-320C limited it's desireability to second tier freight haulers. Also, even though there are C135's that have been re-engined, the 707 did not make the cut for the very same reason, the cost of upgrading the engines on a 707 was hard to justify, when you could get more lift out of a DC8, 61 or 63. The DC8 airframe was very rugged and compared to the B707, had a degree of durability not seen in the Boeing airframes of that generation, this according to Boeing engineers themselves.

 

[Dizel8]

There are still some 707's flying cargo, might be one or two pax birds left, but both kinds are mostly found in thirdworld countries.

The DC-8, due to design, was much easier to stretch. The 707 due to the short landing gear would have tail issues.

Since there were quite a few DC-8's in service, UAL was operating quite a few, a company called Gamma Corp, which was mostly ex Douglas employees, designed the pylon modification which could incorporate the CFM's.

The stretched 8 was by far the most popular for the modification, becoming DC8-71 or DC8-72, however, there were a few of the DC8-62's that become -72's. The one was for an arms dealer, another belonged to Aramco and I believe NASA operated one, now with UND I believe.

I guess the short story is, that the 8 just offered more bang for the buck!

Some more info on the Mighty 8: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC-8

 

[SAAB Driver]

I was looking at airliners.net into the size and weights of the aircraft and never considered the length. Is there a standard size pallet in the cargo world? If there is, any info on its size, the load it can take, and how many can fit on a DC-8?

Lastly, with hush kits a requirement of stage III, in 1999, did those aircraft take a hit on fuel burn to achieve the noise compliance?

 

[Spooky 2]

There are still some 707's flying cargo, might be one or two pax birds left, but both kinds are mostly found in thirdworld countries.

The DC-8, due to design, was much easier to stretch. The 707 due to the short landing gear would have tail issues.

Since there were quite a few DC-8's in service, UAL was operating quite a few, a company called Gamma Corp, which was mostly ex Douglas employees, designed the pylon modification which could incorporate the CFM's.

The stretched 8 was by far the most popular for the modification, becoming DC8-71 or DC8-72, however, there were a few of the DC8-62's that become -72's. The one was for an arms dealer, another belonged to Aramco and I believe NASA operated one, now with UND I believe.

The NASA/UND DC8 is sitting out at KMCC (McClellan) undergoing a D check. More patches and protrusions on that aircraft than a porcupine. I understand that a group of former UPS age 60+ guys fly it when it's inservice. Please, lets not hijack this otherwise intersesting string with some age 60 comments.

 

[DC8 Flyer]

There are still some 707's flying cargo, might be one or two pax birds left, but both kinds are mostly found in thirdworld countries.

The DC-8, due to design, was much easier to stretch. The 707 due to the short landing gear would have tail issues.

Since there were quite a few DC-8's in service, UAL was operating quite a few, a company called Gamma Corp, which was mostly ex Douglas employees, designed the pylon modification which could incorporate the CFM's.

The stretched 8 was by far the most popular for the modification, becoming DC8-71 or DC8-72, however, there were a few of the DC8-62's that become -72's. The one was for an arms dealer, another belonged to Aramco and I believe NASA operated one, now with UND I believe.

I guess the short story is, that the 8 just offered more bang for the buck!

Some more info on the Mighty 8: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC-8

Just to clarify a -71 is a -61 with the CFM engines. Same airframe, different powerplant. Same goes for a -73 or -72

 

[Spooky 2]

I was looking at airliners.net into the size and weights of the aircraft and never considered the length. Is there a standard size pallet in the cargo world? If there is, any info on its size, the load it can take, and how many can fit on a DC-8?

Lastly, with hush kits a requirement of stage III, in 1999, did those aircraft take a hit on fuel burn to achieve the noise compliance?

I think the CFM's were Stage 3 out of the box and certainly a lot more fuel efficient than the JT3D's that were originally installed. Don't know about the containers. I think most 3rd world operators simply free load the cargo and strap it down on pallets or cookie sheets as they are sometimes called.

 

[sinkrate]

If it is old, in the air and in commercial service it says 'Douglass Commercial' on the registration. There are still DC-3's, 4's and 6's in the air. There are no Boeing 247's or StratoCruisers in commercial use. There are still several hundred DC-8's in use. There are just a handfull of 707's in civilian use. There are still several hundred DC-9-30's in scheduled use. I don't think there are any 737-100's in scheduled service. The only life limited airframe part in the DC-9-30 is the aft pressure bulkhead at 120,000 cycles. And there is an $800,000 fix for that.

 

[Piper877]

Is the the KC-135 a 707 or DC-8? I always thought it was a 707. I see quite a few at Grissom ARB (GUS) when I drive by on 31.