Psa53 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3121 posts, RR: 4 Posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3561 times:
The 727-300 was proposed in the 1970's,
by Boeing, as a twin jet, stretch by 18 feet, 4 inches,
over the 727-200adv.with newer 20,850 pound trust powerplants.United was very interested in this verision but 757/767 program killed it.
Such a verison may retain Southwest as a loyal customer, get back
EasyJet and Ryanair and also knowing AA MD fleet might be considered
right for replacing.
Should Boeing reconsider the T-tail verison and re-name it (797?)
and replace the 737 production?
Stretch the 717?
Bring out both, a MD format(717) and a Boeing verison and have the
best of both worlds?
Atrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5717 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3514 times:
in a way the 727-300 WAS the 757-200. The 757 was a twin engine, it was strecthed....single aisle, longer, only difference was longer aircraft, longer rnage AND engine was under the wing instead of the back, and it was a straight tail and not a T-Tail.
The ONLY T-TAIL aircraft was the 727. the 717 was technically Douglas but renamed in Boeing but the idea was created from Douglas. I do not think Boeing likes the T-TAIL.
Strecth the 717 anymore it will become the MD-80 series, so I would think rather shorten it however it would become the DC-9 again. so just give it more range and engine power etc etc.
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
Flyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3508 times:
The 727, compared to today's counterparts, needs to get itself on a treadmill. Redesign it to weigh less, as well as make it a twin, and you're probably going to be left with something that looks a lot like a fat MD-90. The 737 line is going great and for the time being, the best thing to replace the 737 line with is.....another batch of 737 versions.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it (especially with something that is "broke").
Aloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4542 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3471 times:
It wouldn't work today, I'm afraid.
Boeing has got the 727's former market WELL covered by the 737NG series. All routes on which the 727 was formerly the main means of travel, are now flown by the 73G and 738. A large chunk of the 727's high-end market was eaten away by the 757 as well. And of course there's the 739 which although not popular right now, still covers a certain pax range.
Also considering that the 737 Ng series has perhaps the most advanced flight decks to be included on any Boeing airliner, I doubt Boeing would want to introduce a product that would literally fly in the face of this new technology. And the airlines love the 737 NG, you'd be hard pressed to get sales out of a newer airliner that would essentially offer the same thing that the 738 does, except with rea-mounted engines and a T-tail.
There was also a Boeing executive (one who helped to shut down the 727 production in the end), who once said that he would not allow a new airliner to be designed with a T-tail, as T-tail aircraft are more prone to "deep stall" than normal tail aircraft are.
the 717 was a change from that, but we also have to keep in mind that it was never a built-fron-scratch design on Boeing's part, it's a carry-over from McDonnell-Douglas. But Boeing designing a new airliner, from scratch, with a T-tail, is something you may never see again.
And it's sad because if you ask me, any T-tailed aircraft beats any low-tail aircraft in terms of aesthetics, and in my opinion, T-tailed aircraft give a much smoother, stable flight than their low-tail counterparts. But that's just based on my experience.
It would be neat to see though. The 727 is my favourite aircraft and I'd give my left arm to see a new production variant of it announced. But it just can't happen now.
On the bright side though, the demise of the 727's production line did usher in new improvements to cockpit layout, design, and avionics, on the 757-200 and 767. And those in turn pointed the way to the ultra-advanced cockpits we see today. So I guess there were some benefits and the 757 is a beautiful aircraft. But it's a tough call to say whether the 723 would have had a cockpit similar to that of the existing 757...as I'm sure some airlines would have wanted commonality with their existing 727 fleets. We still would have gotten to the level we are today in terms of advanced cockpits...but it might have happened later rather than sooner.
I'd be very interested to see what reaction Boeing, and the public, would have if an airline approached Boeing and specifically asked them to built them a Boeing 727. A new one, with the promise of a huge order, and refused to take any 737 or A32X product. I bet Boeing would laugh in their face, but I'd be seriously interested to see the reaction of that company...and the world.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8212 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3419 times:
Actually, Boeing did some very serious studies of building a 727 that replaced the three JT8D engines with two PW2037 engines. If the PW2037-powered 727 had actually been launched it's very likely that 727 production would have continued well past 1984, probably well into the 1990's! Because the two-PW2037 setup would have been vastly quieter than the three-JT8D setup, this could have resulted in substantial orders not only from AA, CO, DL, NW and UA, but very likely a number of European airlines (the planes sold to Europe would probably be powered by RB.211-535C's), which could have effectively kiboshed the A320 project.
The PW2037-powered 727 would probably have switched to a two-crew cockpit by the late 1980's, and would likely sport a cockpit almost identical to what we see now on the Next-Generation 737. It would probably get the quiet wing design with winglets and modified flap design to reduce noise levels further since there wouldn't be a need to run full power for takeoffs.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16473 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3362 times:
The 727-300 that was offered to UA in the mid-70's was a simply stretch of the 722. It would have retained the JT8D's and 3-man crew. UA was interested & Boeing would have built it had UA been a launch customer.
As it was, UA did not follow thru with an order. The 762 was launched in July 1978 and the 752 a year later.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
BillElliott9 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3211 times:
What may have killed the PW2037 project is the fact the 7572 is only one foot longer than the 727-200 but capacity of 182+ compared to approximately 156. (I'm using 1984 NW seating as a point of reference).
Elwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3094 times:
Stretch the 717 and you get something more akin to a DC-9-50 rather than an MD-80. It's much lighter than the MD-80s were. Also, the original specs for the 757 called for a T-tail design.
I remember reading that AA was interested in the twin-engined 727 concept, even retro-fitting some of their existing 727s, but when MDD offered the MD-80 at such an incredible bargain, they optioned MD-80s instead. Now AA has 350 MD-80, including roughly 100 from TW, and no one ever bought the "723"...
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.