Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Does The Boeing 720 Deserve To Be A Separate Type?  
User currently offlineDuke From Canada, joined Sep 1999, 1155 posts, RR: 2
Posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3827 times:

Of the 1010 Boeing 707s that were built between 1957 and 1991, 154 were actually designated "Boeing 720" - a medium range, shorter version of the plane. Nowadays, however, we often treat it as merely a subtype from what I see. I think we can agree (note my thread of 2 days ago) that the 707's "prototype" (the "Dash-80" or the 367-80, not included in the 1010 planes) and the similar looking KC-135 tanker were truly different models and not 707s, but the 720's differences don't really seem enough to fully qualify it as a different model. Originally it was supposed to be the 707-000 anyway. For some reason, they changed the designation.

So my question is twofold. First, why did they call it the 720 and secondly, are the differences really so different that it deserves to be given a separate type number? For example, is it more different from the original 707-100 than the 707-300 is?

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7415 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3784 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The designation for the 720/B was a combination of 2 designations. The 720 was originally designated as a 707-020/B and was shortened to 720 to simplify it and make it seem like a new version rather than have potential customers thinking that they're buying the base model.


Made from jets!
User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 2, posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3784 times:

The 720 is actually the 707-020. I think of it as a different type although American Airlines referred to their 720s as 707s ("707 Luxury Liner" etc).


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineJustplanesmart From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 723 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3767 times:

I will do my best to answer both parts of your query. The designation 720 came as a direct result of United being the launch customer. In a nutshell, W. A. "Pat" Patterson, longtime head of UA, wanted it to be called something other than a 707, because United had already bought the DC-8. Boeing suggested 717, but apparently Pat did not like a number ending in 7, so it became the 720 (his opinion clearly changed by the time the 727, 737, and 747 were all purchased by his company). As to whether it qualifies as a separate type, I have always considered it a 707, and Boeing has always included its sales/production in the totals for the 707. If you really want to study the minutiae between the 707/720 variants, click below and read away.
http://dac.senternet.com/forum/showthread.php?s=ddabca5d0187ff6fae9d911cdb751231&threadid=21531&highlight=boeing+707

[Edited 2004-02-06 13:08:01]


"So many planes; so little time..."
User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3749 times:

Dead right about United not wanting to buy "707s" (even little ones) after the big DC8 purchase, but I think 717 was impossible not because of Patterson's dislike of the number 7 (727, 737 etc), but because the Boeing designation for the KC-135 was 717 (which also tells you why 717 was never used til the rebadged DC9 of the late 90s).


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineDuke From Canada, joined Sep 1999, 1155 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3652 times:

Well, that's an exhaustive thread! Thank you.

User currently offlineIsitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3571 times:

This grayhair has alway wondered about the 720 and why it was numbered so. Thanks to all for the info. I have ridden numberous 720B models with CO, AA, called the 707 AstroJet as noted in an earlier post, and NW. Thank you all again.


If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineCanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3393 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (10 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3532 times:

The 720 is basicly a 707, only it is a bit shorter and has a slightly lighter structure. The 707 was mainly for longer hauls so Boeing made the 720 a little smaller and lighter which meant it was more efficient on shorter hops and was able to operate in and out of airports with shorter runway lenghs.

The diff between a 720 and a 720B is the same as say a 707-300 and a 707-300B.

The reason it was called the 720 and not the 707-020 or the 717, was already stated in previous replys. In my oppinion it should be slightly diff from the 707, but not a completly diff type (717 or something), and they seemed to have the same idea when they called the "707-020" the "Boeing 720"




Hope this helps
CanadianNorth



What could possibly go wrong?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
When Is The Boeing 7E7 Supposed To Be In Service? posted Thu Aug 21 2003 22:11:50 by Chicago757
Why Is The Boeing 720 Weaker And Lighter? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 16:57:56 by Duke
The A380 Doesn't Seem To Be Big At All? posted Mon Oct 31 2005 15:45:06 by Varig767
Soon The 757 Will Need To Be Replaced! posted Thu Oct 13 2005 00:46:14 by CV990
Are The NH 744's Eventuallygoing To Be Phased Out? posted Tue Sep 20 2005 09:32:06 by Ktachiya
The New BOS Runway To Be Completed In 2006! posted Mon Apr 18 2005 17:28:31 by BoeingBus
The MD-80 Next To Be Mass Retired? posted Wed Jan 26 2005 00:13:55 by Jetpixx
When Does The BA 744 Return To PHX? posted Sun Nov 30 2003 20:16:08 by AV8AJET
STL No Longer The Hub It Used To Be posted Mon Nov 3 2003 22:51:19 by Thrust
When Are The CM's 738's Going To Be Delivered? posted Sun Sep 21 2003 05:29:22 by B752fanatic
The A380 Doesn't Seem To Be Big At All? posted Mon Oct 31 2005 15:45:06 by Varig767
Soon The 757 Will Need To Be Replaced! posted Thu Oct 13 2005 00:46:14 by CV990
Are The NH 744's Eventuallygoing To Be Phased Out? posted Tue Sep 20 2005 09:32:06 by Ktachiya
The New BOS Runway To Be Completed In 2006! posted Mon Apr 18 2005 17:28:31 by BoeingBus