FlyingNanook From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 830 posts, RR: 11 Posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11762 times:
I am currently reading Turbulent Skies, which is an excellent book about the history of commercial aviation. It has this picture of an L1011 in it.
I know that 747's can ferry an extra engine, but I never heard of an L1011 doing so. Since this one is in Lockheed house colors, was this capability just being tested? Or did all production L1011's have this capability? If so, are there any other pictures of them ferrying engines?
Thanks all, and apologies for the quality of the scan.
Air2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 11514 times:
Back in the days before airfriegt was as common as it is today, an airline had to be able to move a large engine (JT9, CF6, RB211) very quickly if they had a problem in an area where there was no engine available.
The manufacturers decided to add an option to their airframes which would enable an engine to be carried as exterior payload. This engine was non functioning and could be carried on revenue flight. So, your recovery aircraft could also carry your engine. We had one ready to go at PanAm over in one of the hangars at JFK. It only took an experienced crew between 2 and 3 hours to install. I believe the option was available on B747, L1011 & DC10.
Now, with all this heavy lift (B747, MD11, DC10) cpability in frieghters readily available, the practice has fallen out of use. Though I wonder if a Trent or GE90 could be carried on the deck of a B747 or such.
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9402 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 month 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 11507 times:
I'm sure they where just doing Aerodynamic Loads Testing. This was in the days before computers, so on paper they could get a good idea of what it would behave like, but the only way to really know was strap on an engine and go fly.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
Blkav8tor2003 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 8 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8349 times:
Blkav8tor2003 here and this is my first post. I also have a pic for you. Here at KPHX Skyharbor Int'l Honeywell has a private flying testbed of the B720-051B variant and it carries an extra engine pod that works on a/c right side just aft of the cockpit. I will include a link from a photo airliners.net sorry I don't know how to post a pic so you can see it right away but give me time. Good question, I'll keep on reading and start posting more. "Keep the Blue Side Up!"
"Straighten Up And Fly Right!"....Tuskegee Airman 99th Fighter Squadron
Fanofjets From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2135 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 month 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 8220 times:
In one of my old 707 books, I have a picture of a Qantas 707-138 ferrying an extra engine. I believe this is a picture of Boeing's testing of this feature; the idea of ferrying an extra jet engine goes back at least to the early 1960s.
What I find unusual in the picture of the Lockheed L-1011 prototype is that the aircraft is carrying the spare engine on the starboard side; every other picture I have seen shows the spare engine on the port side.
Stirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 19
Reply 20, posted (11 years 1 month 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7241 times:
Dog, I am not sure if you were serious or not, so for the sake of the people not getting the joke, or too young to know any better, the engine on top of the C-82 Packet was not the spare engine being transported. But you all knew that. Right?
That engine was there to aid in take-off performance.
Da man From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 887 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (11 years 1 month 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7142 times:
There would be a range penalty and you most likely couldn't put as many pax on the plane as without the extra engine, but the aircraft could still be used for a revenue flight if the load factor for the flight is right.