SASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 662 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4501 times:
I think I vote for the DC8. Though I don't like the - very distinctive fat Douglas nose - I think it looks just sleeker and better shaped. The 707 has some strange designs and - in my opinion - the wings are too large. I like the power of the 707 though.
Is it fair to compare the 707 vs. the DC8 as Mercedes vs a Rolls Royce?
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10167 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4441 times:
707. One of the most beautiful airliners ever and the second most attractive Jet Boeing has built, after the 747. One of the most balanced airplane designs I know off. Its in all details nicer than the DC-8, which wasnt bad either though.
Another reason I chose the DC8 is because it has enjoyed a longer life span than the 707. Yes there are still a couple of 707's flying but the DC8 has proven to be more adaptable to modern technology. Which is why a lot of them are still flying and are even used as snazzy looking bizjets.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 23838 posts, RR: 23
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4076 times:
Quoting longhauler (Reply 12): I always thought the B707 to be too "bulky" in the forward fuselage, as it became very deep very fast. Not like the B727 which has a much sleeker forward fuselage.
Agree. While the 707 is fairly attractive when airborne, I have always considered the DC-8 more stylish when on the ground. I think it's because the DC-8 sits with a slight nose-down angle while the opposite seems to apply for the 707. That seems to give the DC-8 a "sportier" appearance on the ground. For the same reason, the Embraer 190 reminds me of a 2-engine DC-8.
747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3918 times:
[quote=FlySSC,reply=16]They did !
The B707 was used for testing the CFM-56 engines, back in the early 80s [/quot]
Yes, it was called a 707 700, but due to fact that the 707 was not that much larger than a 727 200, and the they thought a 707 700 could hurt the 767 program, Boeing decided not to help the 707 700 program. It is too bad, a 707 700 would have been great for a charter airline back in the 80's.