Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
707 Barrel Role  
User currently offlineWelwitschia From Namibia, joined Mar 2005, 27 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 12042 times:

On Tuesday Discovery featured an aviation programme "flying heavy metal" or something like that, discussing the 707 and how it came about etc.
Then they showed footage of the test pilot performing a barrel role. I had heard of this story before and had put it down as a myth. Truely amazing - would this be possible with current airliners and did anyone watch the programme?

44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGlidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1020 posts, RR: 44
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 12023 times:

Hi!

I haven't seen the programme, but I saw a other TV-programme in which they showed the barrel role. There exists even a foto, made from the 707. It shows the engines on top of the wing and lake Washington underneath the wing. Really cool!
I think it would be even possible to do a barrel roles for most of the current airliners. I don't know if a 747 or a 380 could do the role without any structural overloads. Would be very interesting to test it!
 scratchchin 

Regards,
Patrick



Aviation! That rocks...
User currently offlineMxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 35
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 12001 times:

Quoting Glidepath73 (Reply 1):
I don't know if a 747 or a 380 could do the role without any structural overloads.

According to what I've read about the famous barrel roll, Tex Johnson chose that particular move because it exerted no abnormal stress on the aircraft, either positive or negative. It did however make for one hell of a show and brought many orders for the 707 for Boeing.

MxCtrlr  bouncy 



DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 11988 times:

If you want to see it, this is a link to a clip showing the roll and an interview with the fellow who performed it:

http://www.aviationexplorer.com/707_roll_video.htm


User currently offlineGlidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1020 posts, RR: 44
Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 11966 times:

Quoting MxCtrlr (Reply 2):
Tex Johnson chose that particular move because it exerted no abnormal stress on the aircraft, either positive or negative.

True, but nobody tried this until today with a 747 for instance....
Why? Would it be to risky somehow?



Aviation! That rocks...
User currently offlineNWArocks From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 11926 times:

Barrel Rolls, when executed properly are not particularly stressful to the airframe or "risky". However, the key is "when executed properly". The margin for error in an aircraft not designed for aerobatics just isn't that great.

You might find it interesting that, "back in the day", at instructor school, we used to have a "confidence maneuver" where a tanker (KC-135; 707 variant) and a bomber (B-52) would do "the whiff". The "whiff' was a series of ever greater opposing turns, while climbing and descending, ultimately ending in the aircraft breaking though 90 degrees of bank--all while connected for air refueling!

The whiff demonstrated some of the aircrafts capabilities when properly flown. Now, regarding margins for error...

There was an instance over in the desert after the first gulf war where a tanker flew into the wake vortices of a proceeding craft in a refueling formation. The aircraft experienced rolling moments that exceeded lateral control capabilities. The event didn't last too long (they flew out of the vortice) but the event did exceed structural capabilities--the struts (for the pod mounted engines) are very strong with regards to fore and aft, and up and down loadings; not so for side-loadings--two of the engines (on the same side) were slung off the plane. Note: Boeing built a good jet in the KC-135 and the crew made a successfully two-engine landing.

Now, lastly you wondered if a 747 or 380 could do a barrel roll. I have yet to fly an airbus, but aerodynamically/structurally I see no reason why it wouldn't be capable of doing so. Whether the software would allow the pilots to execute such a maneuver, I have no idea. Boeing's design philosophy is a little different. They'll give you all kinds of warnings and cues, but ultimately allow the pilot to fly the aircraft as he/she deems necessary.

Cheers


User currently offlineZKEYE From New Zealand, joined May 2005, 242 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 11904 times:

I read about this in a Boeing book a while ago. (Sorry I have forgotten which book - it came from a library) Tex Johnson stated that is was totally safe as it was a "zero G" maneuver. He was told by a Boeing exec not to do it again. However they were not all that unhappy that he did it as the publicity was great for them. If he was correct about it being a zero G maneuver (and I guess he would know) then any airliner should be able to do it. A380/747 doing it? shite wouldn't that be a sight?

[Edited 2005-05-20 13:26:46]


Bring out the gimp
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 11844 times:

Quoting ZKEYE (Reply 6):
Tex Johnson stated that is was totally safe as it was a "zero G" maneuver.

Don't you mean 1 G.


User currently offlineZKEYE From New Zealand, joined May 2005, 242 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 11807 times:

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 7):
Quoting ZKEYE (Reply 6):
Tex Johnson stated that is was totally safe as it was a "zero G" maneuver.

Don't you mean 1 G.

Quite right - sorry.

Just back from the rugby (Crusaders beat Hurricanes) and not performing at my peak due to large amounts of larger.



Bring out the gimp
User currently offlineGlidepath73 From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 1020 posts, RR: 44
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 11786 times:

NWArocks

Thanks for your very interesting post!
Would be really amazing to see once a barrel role flown with a 747/380.....

I whish you guys a nice weekend!

Regards,
Patrick



Aviation! That rocks...
User currently offlineMxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 35
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 11682 times:

To further this thread, I do know that a B-727-200 was put into a barrel roll (accidentally however the aircraft and pax survived with no damage from the roll - the subsequent Mach 1 dive and recovery, exacted quite a bit of damage. Of course I am speaking of the TWA flight a number of years ago). I also believe, if memory serves correctly, that CAAC (China Air) also let a B-747 "get away from them" and ended up doing a barrel roll (with no damage to the aircraft from the roll - again, the ensuing flat dive exacted quite a bit of damage to the wing tips - a sort of running joke among "whale" mechanics & engineers that Boeing got the design for the blended winglets from this aircraft's damaged wingtips).

Now, to the other side of that coin, as NWArocks stated, the key phrase is "executed correctly". I read a report somewhere on-line (I can't find it right now) where a European 707, on a test flight, was lost due to the crew's attempting to "recreate" Tex Johnson's barrel roll, and not performing it correctly thereby losing the engines on one side and losing control of the aircraft.

MxCtrlr  bouncy 



DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
User currently offlineVzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 835 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 11679 times:

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 7):
Don't you mean 1 G

Barrel rolls are generally relatively mild aerobatic manuevers, but they'll always involve more than 1 G, typically at least 2-3 G.
-Mark



"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 11621 times:

Quoting MxCtrlr (Reply 2):
Tex Johnson chose that particular move because it exerted no abnormal stress on the aircraft, either positive or negative. It did however make for one hell of a show and brought many orders for the 707 for Boeing.

Do you think He must have tried the Manervue prior to that day on that Aircraft.

Quoting MxCtrlr (Reply 10):
I also believe, if memory serves correctly, that CAAC (China Air) also let a B-747 "get away from them" and ended up doing a barrel roll

Whats the story behind this.

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 7):
Quoting ZKEYE (Reply 6):
Tex Johnson stated that is was totally safe as it was a "zero G" maneuver.

Don't you mean 1 G.

Is a 1G roll possible with a B707.Shouldn't it be a little higher.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1609 posts, RR: 52
Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 11563 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Vzlet (Reply 11):
Barrel rolls are generally relatively mild aerobatic manuevers, but they'll always involve more than 1 G, typically at least 2-3 G.

If flown right, they are always 1G maneuvers.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12150 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 11562 times:

Quoting NWArocks (Reply 5):
You might find it interesting that, "back in the day", at instructor school, we used to have a "confidence maneuver" where a tanker (KC-135; 707 variant) and a bomber (B-52) would do "the whiff". The "whiff' was a series of ever greater opposing turns, while climbing and descending, ultimately ending in the aircraft breaking though 90 degrees of bank--all while connected for air refueling!

The whiff demonstrated some of the aircrafts capabilities when properly flown. Now, regarding margins for error...

Yes, that was one of several unusual attitudes demonstrated at CFIC (Central Flight Instructors Course) at Castle AFB, CA. It showed the real limitations of the KC-135, B-52, and the aircrews. The Boom Operator and B-52 Pilot were the key positions for these manuvers.

Quoting NWArocks (Reply 5):
There was an instance over in the desert after the first gulf war where a tanker flew into the wake vortices of a proceeding craft in a refueling formation. The aircraft experienced rolling moments that exceeded lateral control capabilities. The event didn't last too long (they flew out of the vortice) but the event did exceed structural capabilities--the struts (for the pod mounted engines) are very strong with regards to fore and aft, and up and down loadings; not so for side-loadings--two of the engines (on the same side) were slung off the plane. Note: Boeing built a good jet in the KC-135 and the crew made a successfully two-engine landing.

That was an ANG KC-135E. There was also a mid-air collision (before Desert Storm) between a KC-135E and an E-3B while they were doing unauthorized formation flying off each others wingtips. The KC-135 lost #3 and #4 engines to seperation and the E-3 lost 25'+ of the left wing and #1 engine. Both airplanes were recovered safely. The careers of the two Pilots and Co-Pilots didn't recover.

Quoting MxCtrlr (Reply 10):
To further this thread, I do know that a B-727-200 was put into a barrel roll (accidentally however the aircraft and pax survived with no damage from the roll - the subsequent Mach 1 dive and recovery, exacted quite a bit of damage. Of course I am speaking of the TWA flight a number of years ago). I also believe, if memory serves correctly, that CAAC (China Air) also let a B-747 "get away from them" and ended up doing a barrel roll (with no damage to the aircraft from the roll - again, the ensuing flat dive exacted quite a bit of damage to the wing tips - a sort of running joke among "whale" mechanics & engineers that Boeing got the design for the blended winglets from this aircraft's damaged wingtips).

The TWA B-727 happened because the crew was playing with deploying the outboard leading edge slats at cruise altitude and speed. IIRC they were over upstate NY. One of the slats deployed slightly before the other side did, rolling the airplane very quickly and then falling off on a wing into a barrel roll. But they were desending rapidly.

The CAAC B-747 happened from FL430. The airplane was on auto-pilot and the crew slowly pulled the power back until it stalled. They lost 25,000'+ trying to recover. They were over the Pacific and going to LAX, I believe.

Quoting ZKEYE (Reply 6):
Tex Johnson stated that is was totally safe as it was a "zero G" maneuver.



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 12):
Is a 1G roll possible with a B707.Shouldn't it be a little higher.
regds
MEL

No, I believe Tex said it was a safe 2G manuver. That is what Boeing thought they designed the B-367-80 to. They discovered later the -80, KC-135, and B-707/720 were actually 3.5G airplanes (operational limitations by the USAF and airlines was 2.5Gs).

You are correct, Mel, a 1G barrel roll is not possible. The manuver is 2Gs minimum (unless you go to negitive Gs).


User currently offlineVzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 835 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 11536 times:

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 13):
If flown right, they are always 1G maneuvers.

AeroWeanie, I'd submit that a plane's flight path can't be altered without inducing an acceleration.



"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1609 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 11462 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
The TWA B-727 happened because the crew was playing with deploying the outboard leading edge slats at cruise altitude and speed. IIRC they were over upstate NY. One of the slats deployed slightly before the other side did, rolling the airplane very quickly and then falling off on a wing into a barrel roll. But they were desending rapidly.

This is the story as I was told it: the TWA crew was applying the "bootleg" maneuver, whereby the breakers for the slats were pulled and the flaps were run out slightly (Flaps5?). The flight engineer wasn't in on the maneuver and seeing the breakers pulled, he reset them. The slats came out. The crew managed to get all but one retracted. It hung, before ripping off. The hang started the rolls. It all happened over the Bay City/Midland area in Michigan. A friend of mine found parts in his front yard the next morning. The "bootlleg" flap droop was later certified and is part of the Valsan/Quietwing winglet mod.

Quoting Vzlet (Reply 15):
AeroWeanie, I'd submit that a plane's flight path can't be altered without inducing an acceleration

You're quite right - the pull to initiate the maneuver is a deviation from 1G flight. Now that I think about it, the point of the barrel roll, as opposed to an aileron roll, is that the loading is constant and positive.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12150 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 11440 times:

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 13):
Quoting Vzlet (Reply 11):
Barrel rolls are generally relatively mild aerobatic manuevers, but they'll always involve more than 1 G, typically at least 2-3 G.

If flown right, they are always 1G maneuvers.

Not really, 1G is what is applied to an airplane that is not accelerating or deccelerating. 1G is only acheved in cruise, or standing on the ramp in calm winds. Any gust factor inflight, or on the ground, will produce a G load factor, including normal turns, climbs, or decents, though the load factor may be so small as to not be noticed.

If your airplane has an AOA meter (Angle Of Attack) or accelerorometer, you can see the loads applied to the airplane. In the KC-135, we had both of these instruments.

Boeing really over designs it's airplanes, though that may not be intentional. That started with their model B-277 design. We now know the B-277 as the B-17. Their model B-247 all metal twin was not nearly as strong as the model B-277.

I have to say Vzlet is right with this one, AeroWeanie.


User currently offlineCURLYHEADBOY From Italy, joined Feb 2005, 940 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11394 times:

There were also those two guys that tried a barrel roll with a Beech 99 and only succeeded in digging a smoking hole into the ground...

Link to the ASN report: http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19930428-0

Link to CVR transcript: http://www.tailstrike.com/280493.htm



If God had wanted men to fly he would have given them more money...
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9633 posts, RR: 68
Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11364 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

The plane that Tex did the barrel role in, the "Dash-80" was a hand built aircraft, and the historians at Boeing will tell you that it was overbuilt by a factor of 6. The think is built like a tank, albiet a tank that can do a roll Big grin

User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39887 posts, RR: 74
Reply 20, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11345 times:

Backfire:
Thanks for the video link. That was amazing.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineWelwitschia From Namibia, joined Mar 2005, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 11273 times:

the CAAC was a 747SP and sustained quite some structural damage but whether it did a barrel role - have not heard about it?!

User currently offlineBoeingnut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 11235 times:

It was China Airlines that sent the 747SP supersonic, not CAAC or Air China.

China Airlines = Taiwan

CAAC & Air China = PRC

You'd think for an aviation board like this that goes nuts over every time someone spells QANTAS with a U, we'd be able to keep this straight


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26499 posts, RR: 75
Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 11192 times:

Quoting Vzlet (Reply 11):
Barrel rolls are generally relatively mild aerobatic manuevers, but they'll always involve more than 1 G, typically at least 2-3 G.



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 12):
Is a 1G roll possible with a B707.Shouldn't it be a little higher.

Well, Tex stated that he "kept the plane to 1G". I am guessing he meant that he kept the Dash-80 to 1G in whatever position in which it was flying. Hence, I am betting that it was actually a 2G roll.

BTW, a Fed-Ex DC-10 was put into more than 1 roll when a disgruntelled soon to be former employee attacked the flight crew and planned to crash the plane into the MEM Superhub but failed. The crew was able to fight him off and they rolled the plane to neutralize him



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 19
Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 11181 times:

I'd like to see the A380 do a Barrel Roll Big grin

Rob!


25 Shankly : The L1011 was rolled (accidentally) during CAA certification for BA In the US, the FAA requirement was to only take the aircraft to stall warning and
26 KC135TopBoom : That story about the VC-10 is true. But a simular manuver in an airplane with eingines in under wing pods would not lose their engines. While the man
27 Shankly : KC135TopBoom...perhaps I over emphasized the engines being ripped off and should have added wings and tail. The VC-10 just happened to be a magnificen
28 KC135R : I watch the video almost every week, show it to emphasize the achievement the KC-135 is, since it came from the -80. Tex Johnson, on the video I show
29 OttoPylit : Here is a post that I once made in regard to the 707 roll, quoted from Tex Johnston's autobiography: In regards to Tex Johnston rolling the Dash 80 70
30 KC135R : Indeed it is, and that airplane has a colorful history. Other than being rolled it also had an engine mounted in the tail for a time to test that set
31 StevenUhl777 : A.K.A "Seattle Seafair" in these parts...Tex did his famous barrell roll over Lake Washington in 1955 or 1956, not sure which.
32 OttoPylit : I was just up there this week and it has a nice place, settled in between the Air France Concourde(Should be BA) and the Enola Gay, although I am not
33 KC135R : Both the E and R were improvements over the A, but the R is somewhat better: Thrust per engine: R = right at 22,000 (governed); E = 18,000/engine - s
34 KC135TopBoom : The BOAC B-707 accident happened in 1962 and, IIRC, the actual break-up of the airplane was pilot induced (although I doubt that was his intentions).
35 Stirling : KC-135A and the B-52G. Man, what a pair. Bomb/Nav 319AMS Grand Forks AFB 1982-85. 32170K to newly arrived 32130K "We close the flightline when the win
36 KC135R : Thanks, I figured there was a MTOW difference between E and R models, but could not find it anywhere.
37 AR1300 : Thx for the link Backfire!!Great!! Mike
38 OttoPylit : No doubt, although from my perspective, the KC-10 just looks more comfy. Nice chair instead of laying down with the chin rest. But, I have never done
39 Post contains images KC135TopBoom : There is one thing the Gucci Bird has to look foreward to. When the last KC-10 flys to the DM Boneyard, she will be refueled, on her way, by the KC-1
40 Skymileman : I tell you what, old Johnston is my hero. That was some amazing flying. I watched the vid of it on the Discovery Wings channel one day. That was aweso
41 Sacflyer : If I recall, this 747 was in cruise flight with the autopilot and autothrottles on over the Pacific. As the aircraft was flying through some turbulen
42 Starlionblue : IIRC that was Lufthansa. LOL. Understatement worthy of a Brit!
43 N501US : Can any of you old SAC guys recount the story (or know of links regarding) of the tragic "Thunderhawks" KC135 crash at Fairchild AFB in the late '80s?
44 Antiuser : In September of 1988, a VP 733 was hijacked by a disgruntled construction worker with a gun, he started shooting at the cockpit door, killed a F/A and
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...
Boeing 707 Barrel Roll Video! posted Fri May 19 2006 15:01:13 by Jetfuel
Boeing 707 Barrel Roll? posted Mon Mar 1 2004 16:11:06 by YooYoo
The "Tex" Johnstone 707 Barrel Roll posted Wed Aug 20 2003 20:05:57 by CoRocks
Togo Government 707 Replaced By DC-8? posted Fri Nov 10 2006 04:55:41 by Starstream707
FAA 707 And 727? Why? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 23:17:10 by N328KF
Boeing 707 At LGB On 11/2 posted Thu Nov 2 2006 00:44:04 by Lincoln
Any Footage Of Concorde Doing A Barrel Roll? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 19:57:38 by Gh123
Qantas 707-138B Returns To Australia In November posted Wed Oct 11 2006 00:33:13 by ClassicLover
707 Loses Its Classic Tail posted Sun Oct 1 2006 18:23:35 by DIA
Russia May Seek Expanded Eads Stakeholding/Role posted Wed Sep 13 2006 07:25:21 by Leelaw
Boeing 707 Barrel Roll? posted Mon Mar 1 2004 16:11:06 by YooYoo
The "Tex" Johnstone 707 Barrel Roll posted Wed Aug 20 2003 20:05:57 by CoRocks
When Did Air France Retire Their Last 707? posted Sun Apr 15 2012 19:10:42 by doulasc
707 At MIA On Evening Of 11 April posted Fri Apr 13 2012 20:20:30 by 28L28L
Pan Am 707 Seating Change Date? posted Thu Mar 15 2012 21:21:24 by Jackbr
50 Years Ago Today - AAL 707 Crash, Idlewild posted Thu Mar 1 2012 09:45:14 by kaitak
Northwest Orient's 707-351Bs With Cargo Doors. posted Sun Feb 5 2012 18:04:12 by doulasc
Avianca 707 (lsf PA, 1960-61)?s posted Sun Jan 29 2012 18:49:01 by Tango-Bravo
American Airlines Fleet Of 10 707-323Bs posted Sun Jan 29 2012 07:24:55 by doulasc